Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-x5gtn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-03T09:22:41.756Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Reductionism in Economics: Intentionality and Eschatological Justification in the Microfoundations of Macroeconomics

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2022

Kevin D. Hoover
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Macroeconomists overwhelmingly believe that macroeconomics requires microfoundations, typically understood as a strong eliminativist reductionism. Microfoundations aims to recover intentionality. In the face of technical and data constraints macroeconomists typically employ a representative-agent model, in which a single agent solves the microeconomic optimization problem for the whole economy, and take it to be microfoundationally adequate. The characteristic argument for the representative-agent model holds that the possibility of the sequential elaboration of the model to cover any number of individual agents justifies treating the policy conclusions of the single-agent model as practically relevant. This eschatological justification is examined and rejected.

Type
Research Article
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 82 , Issue 4 , October 2015 , pp. 689 - 711
Copyright
Copyright © The Philosophy of Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

†

Presented at the conference on Reduction and Emergence in the Sciences at the Center for Advanced Studies at LMU (CASLMU), Ludwigs-Maximilliana Universität, Munich, November 14–16, 2013. I thank Alex Rosenberg and three anonymous referees for comments on an earlier draft.

References

Chari, V. V., and Kehoe, Patrick J.. 2006. “Modern Macroeconomics in Practice: How Theory Is Shaping Policy.” Journal of Economic Perspectives 20 (4): 3–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chari, V. V., and Kehoe, Patrick J. 2008. “Response from V. V. Chari and Patrick J. Kehoe [to Robert M. Solow, “The State of Macroeconomics”].” Journal of Economic Perspectives 22 (1): 247–50.Google Scholar
Cherrier, Beatrice. 2014. “Classifying Economics: A History of the JEL Codes.” Unpublished manuscript, Cente de Recherche en Économie et Management, University of Caen.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dewey, John. 1909. “Darwin’s Influence upon Philosophy.” Popular Science Monthly 75 (1): 90–98.Google Scholar
Dewey, John 1925/1925. Experience and Nature. New York: Dover.Google Scholar
Friedman, Milton. 1957. A Theory of the Consumption Function. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frisch, Ragnar. 1933. “Propagation Problems and Impulse Problems in Dynamic Economics.” In Economic Essays in Honor of Gustav Cassel: October 20th 1933, 171–205. London: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
Godfrey-Smith, Peter. 2007. “James and Dewey on Philosophical Systems.” Unpublished manuscript, Graduate Center, City University of New York, and Unit for the History and Philosophy of Science, University of Sydney.Google Scholar
Gorman, William M. 1953. “Community Preference Fields.” Econometrica 21 (1): 63–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hands, D. Wade. 2014. “The Individual and the Market: Paul Samuelson on (Homothetic) Santa Claus Economics.” European Journal for the History of Economic Thought, forthcoming. doi:10.1080/09672567.2014.916731.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hartley, James E. 1997. The Representative Agent in Macroeconomics. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heckman, James J., and Hansen, Lars Peter. 1996. “The Empirical Foundations of Calibration.” Journal of Economic Perspectives 10 (1): 87–104.Google Scholar
Hoover, Kevin D. 1988. The New Classical Macroeconomics: A Sceptical Inquiry. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Hoover, Kevin D. 1995. “Is Macroeconomics for Real?” Monist 78 (3): 235–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoover, Kevin D. 2001a. Causality in Macroeconomics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoover, Kevin D. 2001b. The Methodology of Empirical Macroeconomics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoover, Kevin D. 2010. “Idealizing Reduction: The Microfoundations of Macroeconomics.” Erkenntnis 73 (3): 329–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoover, Kevin D. 2012a. Applied Intermediate Macroeconomics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hoover, Kevin D. 2012b. “Microfoundational Programs.” In Microfoundations Reconsidered: The Relationship of Micro and Macroeconomics in Historical Perspective, ed. Duarte, Pedro Garcia and Tadeu, Gilberto Lima, 19–61. Cheltenham: Elgar.Google Scholar
Tadeu, Gilberto Lima 2012c. “Pragmatism, Perspectival Realism, and Econometrics.” In Economics for Real: Uskali Mäki and the Place of Truth in Economics, ed. Lehtinen, Aki, Kuorikoski, Jaakko, and Ylikoski, Petri, 223–40. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Hoover, Kevin D., and Warren Young, moderators. 2013. “Rational Expectations: Retrospect and Prospect; A Panel Discussion with Michael Lovell, Robert Lucas, Dale Mortensen, Robert Shiller, and Neil Wallace.” Macroeconomic Dynamics 17 (5): 1169–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Janssen, Maarten C. W. 1993. Microfoundations: A Critical Inquiry. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Janssen, Maarten C. W. 1998. “Microfoundations.” In The Handbook of Economic Methodology, ed. Davis, John, Hands, D. Wade, and Mäki, Uskali, 307–10. Cheltenham: Elgar.Google Scholar
Davis, John, Hands, D. Wade, and Mäki, Uskali 2008. “Microfoundations.” In The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics, 2nd ed., ed. Steven N. Durlauf and Lawrence E. Blume. London: Macmillan. http://www.dictionaryofeconomics.com/article?id=pde2008_M000380.Google Scholar
Keynes, John Maynard. 1936. The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Keynes, John Maynard 1939/1939. “Professor Tinbergen’s Method.” In Collected Writings of J. M. Keynes, vol. 14, 306–18. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
King, J. E. 2012. The Microfoundations Delusion. Cheltenham: Elgar.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
King, Robert G., and Plosser, Charles I.. 1984. “Money, Credit, and Prices in a Real Business Cycle.” American Economic Review 74 (3): 363–80.Google Scholar
Kirman, Alan. 1992. “Whom or What Does the Representative Agent Represent?” Journal of Economic Perspectives 6 (1): 126–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klein, Lawrence J. 1946a. “Macroeconomics and the Theory of Rational Behavior.” Econometrica 14 (2): 93–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klein, Lawrence J. 1946b. “Remarks on the Theory of Aggregation.” Econometrica 14 (4): 303–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klein, Lawrence R. 1947. The Keynesian Revolution. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Klein, Lawrence R. 1992. “My Professional Life Philosophy.” In Eminent Economists: Their Life Philosophies, ed. Szenberg, M., 180–89. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kydland, Finn E., and Prescott, Edward C.. 1991. “The Econometrics of the General Equilibrium Approach to Business Cycles.” Scandinavian Journal of Economics 93 (2): 161–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lucas, Robert E. Jr. 1976/1976. “Econometric Policy Evaluation: A Critique.” Repr. in Studies in Business Cycle Theory, 104–30. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Lucas, Robert E. Jr. 1978. “Asset Prices in an Exchange Economy.” Econometrica 46 (6): 1429–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lucas, Robert E. Jr. 1980. “Methods and Problems in Business Cycle Theory.” Journal of Money, Credit and Banking 12 (4), pt. 2:696–715.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lucas, Robert E. Jr. 1987. Models of Business Cycles. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Lucas, Robert E. Jr., and Sargent, Thomas J.. 1979. “After Keynesian Macroeconomics.” Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis Quarterly Review, no. 321:49–69.Google Scholar
Morgan, Mary S. 1990. The History of Econometric Ideas. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nelson, Alan. 1984. “Some Issues Surrounding the Reduction of Macroeconomics to Microeconomics.” Philosophy of Science 51 (4): 573–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peirce, Charles S. 1931. Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce, Vol. 1, Principles of Philosophy, ed. Hartshorne, Charles and Weiss, Paul. Cambridge, MA: Belknap.Google Scholar
Plosser, Charles I. 1989. “Understanding Real Business Cycles.” Journal of Economic Perspectives 3 (3): 51–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prescott, Edward C. 1986. “Theory Ahead of Business Cycle Measurement.” Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis Quarterly Review 10 (4): 9–22.Google Scholar
Putnam, Hilary. 1975. “Philosophy and Our Mental Life.” In Mind, Language, and Reality, 291–303. Philosophical Papers 2. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robbins, Lionel. 1935. An Essay on the Nature and Significance of Economic Science. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Rosenberg, Alex. 2012. “Why Do Spatiotemporally Restricted Regularities Explain in the Social Sciences?” British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 63 (1): 1–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosenberg, Alex, and Curtain, Tyler. 2013. “What Is Economics Good For?” New York Times, August 24. http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/08/24/what-is-economics-good-for/?_r=0.Google Scholar
Sargent, Thomas J. 1982. “Beyond Demand and Supply Curves in Macroeconomics.” American Economic Review 72 (2): 382–89.Google Scholar
Sargent, Thomas J. 2005. “MD Interview: An Interview with Thomas J. Sargent.” George W. Evans and Seppo Honkapohja, interviewers. Macroeconomic Dynamics 9 (4): 561–83.Google Scholar
Tinbergen, Jan. 1956. Economic Policy: Principles and Design. Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar
Velupillai, Kumaraswamy Vela. 2009. “Macroeconomics: A Clarifying Note.” Economia Politica 26 (1): 135–37.Google Scholar
Weintraub, E. Roy. 1979. Microfoundations: The Compatibility of Microeconomics and Macroeconomics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woodford, Michael. 1999. “Revolution and Evolution in Twentieth-Century Macroeconomics.” Unpublished manuscript, Princeton University.Google Scholar
Wren-Lewis, Simon. 2007. “Are There Dangers in the Microfoundations Consenus?” In Is There a New Consensus in Macroeconomics? ed. Arestis, Philip, 43–60. Basingstoke: Macmillan.Google Scholar