What is sustainability economics?

While economists have been contributing to the discussion of various aspects of sustainability for decades, it is just recently that the term “sustainability economics” was used explicitly in the ecological, environmental, and resource economics community. Yet, the contributions that use the term “sustainability economics” do not refer to any explicit definition of the term, and are not obviously joined by common or unifying characteristics, such as subject focus, methodology, or institutional background. The question thus arises: What is “sustainability economics”? In this essay, we make an attempt at systematically defining and delineating what “sustainability economics” could be in terms of its normative foundation, aims, subject matter, ontology, epistemology, and genuine research agenda.economics, efficiency, epistemology, fairness, future, justice, human-nature-relationship, ontology, philosophy of science, sustainability, uncertainty

Epistimologi Fundamental Ekonomi

Science dichotomy that separates science that is far from the values of religion and science that is concerned with the values of religion has given birth to Islamic economics. In epistemology of Islamic economics, means the economy will talk about the nature of Islam and its fundamentals. Islamic Economics examines the process of human activities related to the production, distribution and consumption in communities that implement the contract in fiqh mu'amalat. Islamic economics as a discipline clearly has epistemological foundations. Discussing economic epistemoligi Islam means examines the origins of Islamic economics, methodology and scientific validity. When talking about the Islamic economic epistemology, meaning the economy will talk about the nature of Islam and its fundamentals. Islamic epistemology based Islamic economics as it relates to the worldview of Islam itsel

Epistemology in Heterodox Economics?

The epistemology of Heterodox Economics has been described as a type of methodological pluralism where its relativism is taken as consistent with new versions of science. However, methodological pluralism has severe drawbacks as a means of inquiry. Whereas Economics is often understood in positivist terms as a closed set, Heterodox Economics includes additional concepts and methods. As an open set of ideas, Heterodox Economics is a means to doubt or to not-know and comprises Einfühlung or the creative intuition for the introduction of new ideas into the epistemology of Economics

Pluralism and social epistemology in economics

Economics plays a significant role in decision-making in contemporary western societies, but its role is increasingly questioned. A recurring topic among the challenges raised by critics is that economics as a discipline lacks sufficient pluralism. That is, it fails to enable, encourage, and respect the use of different ontologies, methodologies, theories, and/or schools of thought to study economic reality. Has this been a productive critique? Does talk about pluralism help identify genuine problems in the discipline? Pluralism in economics could draw support from the current consensus in philosophy that pluralism in science is a good thing. I argue, however, that the claim that economic research is insufficiently pluralist is unlikely to convince economists who believe economics is already pluralist enough and that it does not offer unambiguous recommendations for change. This is because there are too many legitimate ways to interpret how pluralism maps to practice. There are numerous variables that pluralist ideals might focus on—the things that they seek multiple rather than one of—and different interpretations of how many of those variables economics has in practice. Yet, as I go on to argue, this does not mean that talk of pluralism is entirely beside the point, since the reasons pluralists offer for their ideals do help to identify genuine problems in economics. The social epistemic strategies that arguments for pluralism recommend point us to three concrete issues in the way economic research is organised: gender imbalances, a steep internal hierarchy, and a dismissive attitude to outsiders. I show that economic research could be more progressive, representative of the interests of those in society, accepted, and legitimate and less likely to fall into bias if the discipline alleviated its gender imbalances, if it were less hierarchical, and if it had a healthier relationship with outsiders. In chapter 1, I outline the debate about pluralism in economics and explain how my thesis utilises a novel approach to social epistemology to offer a way out of the impasse in which that the debate presently resides. In chapter 2, I explain the different philosophical arguments for pluralism in science and categorise them using the variables they focus on and the reasons they give for pluralism. In chapter 3, I argue that interpreting pluralism as a particular arrangement of variables for economics to attain does not lead to unambiguous recommendations for change because it leaves too much open. Yet, I go on to argue, in chapter 4, that drawing on the reasons for pluralism can provide a set of heuristics for piecemeal evaluations of the social epistemic practices in economics. In chapters 5, 6, and 7, I apply these heuristics to economics. I provide evidence that [a] women are outnumbered in economics and face an adverse environment in the discipline, that [b] economics is steeply hierarchical, and that [c] economists form an in-group that assumes superiority and frequently dismisses outside voices. I argue that these three features of economic research block avenues for productive forms of feedback (mechanisms that help to challenge, justify, and refine scientific knowledge), block the interests of certain perspectives being heard, and block public scrutiny of the decisions made by economists.Funded by the Cambridge Arts and Humanities Research Council doctoral training centre

Reconstruction of concept of Paradigm in Thomas S. Kuhn

This article aims to discuss an evaluation of the concept of paradigm of T. Kuhn in his representative work: The Structure of Scientific Revolutions ERC, [Ku96] and the complementary version by W. Stegmüller, Structure and dynamics of theories EDT, [Steg83]. This refined interpretation of the concept of paradigm allows for a more complete set of central Kuhnian concept.Paradigm, Kuhn, Economics, Stegmüller, Epistemology

THE EPISTEMOLOGY OF AGRIBUSINESS METHODS OF AGRIBUSINESS SCHOLARSHIP

The prevailing agricultural economics epistemology of positivistic knowledge is argued to be inappropriate for the study of agribusiness. In contrast to the traditional arenas of agricultural economics study, agribusiness research should be designed to be (1) theory-building, rather than theory disconfirming, (2) capable of examining phenomena that are not readily quantifiable nor separable from context, and (3) capable of examining phenomena for which the underlying cause-and-effect structure is unstable or not given to general theory. Methods of phenomenological knowledge are much more appropriate to agribusiness research, and these methods should be adopted by agribusiness scholars and recognized for promotion and tenure purposes.Agribusiness,

The rhetoric of economics

This article offers an approach to the general structure of the rhetoric in economy. In our case we adopted a perspective to study a particular aspect of the rhetoric that comes from the context of a particular controversy: the controversy on the advantages of the free commerce between Daly and Bhagwati. It is sustained that the positions in economy present with relative frequency interest conflicts that are revealed in the dialectic one of the arguments. A proponent in open defense of the free commerce is not released of presumptions reflected in the field of the rhetoric. Reason why to include the language dimensions of the argumentation in economy has advantages for the field of the explanation and the epistemology in the social sciences.rhetoric, language, argumentation, theory economics, epistemology, public choice, decision theory

THE RELATION BETWEEN EPISTEMOLOGY AND VALUE THEORY

The aim if this presentation is to explore the relation between epistemology and value theory. Because I want to claim that there is the necessary and reciprocal relation of the theory of knowledge and value theory determine what kind of philosophy can be considered. In the first part of speech, I would like to explain the relation between epistemology and value theory, it is necessary to define the concept of epistemology and the concept of value theory in a general sense. Epistemology is "the theory of knowledge".  The theory of knowledge is an attempt to answer the question, "How do you know?" the question is about how one knows but not about knowing per se. Secondly I will explain the concept of value in philosophy. The concept of value is used in widespread ways in contemporary culture, not only in economics and philosophy, but also especially in other social sciences and the humanities.  In the general definition, the term 'value' is understood as the worth of a thing.  In this meaning, the theory of value can be taken from the science of economics, but the term value has a much broader meaning than in the sense used in economics. At the conclusion, I want to discuss the necessary and reciprocal relation of the theory of knowledge and value theory on the behalf of what kind of philosophy one accepts