dc.contributor.author | Chakraborty, Achin | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2013-08-29T12:46:14Z | |
dc.date.available | 2013-08-29T12:46:14Z | |
dc.date.issued | 1998 | |
dc.identifier.citation | Chakraborty, Achin (1998) The irrelevance of methodology and the art of the possible : reading Sen and Hirschman. CDS working papers series, 286. Trivandrum: CDS. | en_GB |
dc.identifier.uri | https://opendocs.ids.ac.uk/opendocs/handle/20.500.12413/2934 | |
dc.description.abstract | Economic methodologists have observed that economists do not
practice what they think their methodology is. Two positions follow from
this. One insists on the need for ‘better’ practice in maintaining ‘scientific’
standard, while the other takes the literary turn. Following the second
route we argue that appraisal of economic theories cannot be done by
applying a general ‘scientific method’ apart from practice.
Methodological conversations, which are shaped by various strategies
taken by practitioners to persuade each other, can only be studied and
improved by reading the most persuasive of the authors in the discipline.
Writings of Albert Hirschman and Amartya Sen are chosen to be read
following our approach.
JEL Classification : B 41
Key Words : Methodology, positivism, rhetoric, methodological
conversation, internal criticism | en_GB |
dc.language.iso | en | en_GB |
dc.publisher | Centre for Development Studies | en_GB |
dc.relation.ispartofseries | CDS working papers;286 | |
dc.rights.uri | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ | en_GB |
dc.subject | Economic Development | en_GB |
dc.subject | Politics and Power | en_GB |
dc.subject | Science and Society | en_GB |
dc.title | The irrelevance of methodology and the art of the possible : reading Sen and Hirschman | en_GB |
dc.type | Series paper (non-IDS) | en_GB |
dc.rights.holder | CDS | en_GB |
dc.identifier.externaluri | http://www.cds.edu/outreach/publications/working-papers | en_GB |
dc.identifier.koha | 84122 | |