Re: Method

["Dr. Bruce McFarling" <ecbm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

"Harry L. Cook" <hlc710@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote,
on Tue, 27 Aug 2002 09:47:43 -0700


> Am I incorrect that PKT is exclusively about method and

> never beyond that to defining the economic problem

> and analyzing it?


On one point of view, that would be partly right.  In that POV,
PKT is chartered with a particular view of the economic
problem, implying a progression of problem, method, and
then (deductive) analysis, (inductive) synthesis and that
other one that would correspond to James Pearce's abduction,
for which I cannot pin down a name right now.

On another POV, that would be partly right because defining
"the economic problem" is just a technique to give a
special advantage to one or another preferred paradigm,
so that the progression would be from defining the
problem *domain* of economics, then method, then
analysis, synthesis and that other one.

In any event what would be wrong would be the
"exclusively" tag.  What would be right would be the
likely rejection of the major premise of the question,
which is that engaging in a lot of discussion about "the
economic problem: is likely to be fruitful in terms of
advancing into a discussion of thought about problems in
real world economies.