Re: Method

["Harry L. Cook" <hlc710@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Bruce,
My point was simply that I think that income distribution is certainly one
of the economic problems that is fundamental to justice and freedom, but it
never seemed to be discussed.
                                Harry
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dr. Bruce McFarling" <ecbm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <pkt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, August 31, 2002 11:44 AM
Subject: Re: Method


> "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.
>
>
>
>
>