Rational vs historical reconstructions. A note on Blaug

Rodolfo Signorino, Rodolfo Signorino

Risultato della ricerca: Article

5 Citazioni (Scopus)

Abstract

The paper focuses on Blaug’s distinction between rational and historicalreconstruction within the historiography of economics. Blaug’s distinctionis shown to be sterile and misleading and his definitions of no avail to clearthinking. Historical reconstruction (as defined by Blaug) is en empty boxfor reasons which are basically theoretical and not simply practical (asBlaug seems to hold). Moreover, Blaug’s primary polemical target is Whighistoriography and not rational reconstruction: the two concepts coincideonly by means of an ad hoc definition. Blaug’s criticism does not apply toother uses of the concept of rational reconstruction such as that proposed by Lakatos
Lingua originaleEnglish
pagine (da-a)329-338
Numero di pagine10
RivistaEUROPEAN JOURNAL OF THE HISTORY OF ECONOMIC THOUGHT (ONLINE)
Volume10
Stato di pubblicazionePublished - 2003

Fingerprint

Historical Reconstruction
Rational Reconstruction
Economics
Historiography
Lakatos
Criticism
Ad hoc

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Arts and Humanities(all)
  • Economics, Econometrics and Finance (miscellaneous)
  • History and Philosophy of Science

Cita questo

Rational vs historical reconstructions. A note on Blaug. / Signorino, Rodolfo; Signorino, Rodolfo.

In: EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF THE HISTORY OF ECONOMIC THOUGHT (ONLINE), Vol. 10, 2003, pag. 329-338.

Risultato della ricerca: Article

@article{9da322e986ca49258b41ef405c779195,
title = "Rational vs historical reconstructions. A note on Blaug",
abstract = "The paper focuses on Blaug’s distinction between rational and historicalreconstruction within the historiography of economics. Blaug’s distinctionis shown to be sterile and misleading and his definitions of no avail to clearthinking. Historical reconstruction (as defined by Blaug) is en empty boxfor reasons which are basically theoretical and not simply practical (asBlaug seems to hold). Moreover, Blaug’s primary polemical target is Whighistoriography and not rational reconstruction: the two concepts coincideonly by means of an ad hoc definition. Blaug’s criticism does not apply toother uses of the concept of rational reconstruction such as that proposed by Lakatos",
author = "Rodolfo Signorino and Rodolfo Signorino",
year = "2003",
language = "English",
volume = "10",
pages = "329--338",
journal = "European Journal of the History of Economic Thought",
issn = "0967-2567",
publisher = "Routledge",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Rational vs historical reconstructions. A note on Blaug

AU - Signorino, Rodolfo

AU - Signorino, Rodolfo

PY - 2003

Y1 - 2003

N2 - The paper focuses on Blaug’s distinction between rational and historicalreconstruction within the historiography of economics. Blaug’s distinctionis shown to be sterile and misleading and his definitions of no avail to clearthinking. Historical reconstruction (as defined by Blaug) is en empty boxfor reasons which are basically theoretical and not simply practical (asBlaug seems to hold). Moreover, Blaug’s primary polemical target is Whighistoriography and not rational reconstruction: the two concepts coincideonly by means of an ad hoc definition. Blaug’s criticism does not apply toother uses of the concept of rational reconstruction such as that proposed by Lakatos

AB - The paper focuses on Blaug’s distinction between rational and historicalreconstruction within the historiography of economics. Blaug’s distinctionis shown to be sterile and misleading and his definitions of no avail to clearthinking. Historical reconstruction (as defined by Blaug) is en empty boxfor reasons which are basically theoretical and not simply practical (asBlaug seems to hold). Moreover, Blaug’s primary polemical target is Whighistoriography and not rational reconstruction: the two concepts coincideonly by means of an ad hoc definition. Blaug’s criticism does not apply toother uses of the concept of rational reconstruction such as that proposed by Lakatos

UR - http://hdl.handle.net/10447/46375

M3 - Article

VL - 10

SP - 329

EP - 338

JO - European Journal of the History of Economic Thought

JF - European Journal of the History of Economic Thought

SN - 0967-2567

ER -