nep-hpe New Economics Papers
on History and Philosophy of Economics
Issue of 2007‒03‒17
eight papers chosen by
Erik Thomson
University of Chicago

  1. John Maynard Keynes and Ludwig von Mises on Probability By van den Hauwe, Ludwig
  2. Vers une théorie connexioniste de la firme By Bernard Paulré
  3. The Neuroscience of Consumer Decision-Making By Pirouz, Dante
  4. Heuristic Twists and Ontological Creeds - Road Map for Evolutionary Economics By U. Witt
  5. Response to worrying trends in econophysics By McCauley, Joseph L.
  6. Perspectives économiques canadiennes dans un contexte international. By Maurice Marchon
  7. An Introduction to World Economic Long Wave-Crises and Depressions: From Study to Anticipation By dong, congcong
  8. Research Methods in Negotiation: 1965-2004 By M. BUELENS; M. VAN DE WOESTYNE; S. MESTDAGH; D. BOUCKENOOGHE

  1. By: van den Hauwe, Ludwig
    Abstract: The economic paradigms of Ludwig von Mises on the one hand and John Maynard Keynes on the other have been correctly recognized as antithetical at the theoretical level, and as antagonistic with respect to their practical and public policy implications. Characteristically they have also been vindicated by opposing sides of the political spectrum. Nevertheless the respective views of these authors with respect to the meaning and interpretation of probability exhibit a closer conceptual affinity than has been acknowledged in the literature. In particular it is argued that in some relevant respects Ludwig von Mises´ interpretation of the concept of probability exhibits a closer affinity with the interpretation of probability developed by his rival John Maynard Keynes than with the views on probability espoused by his brother Richard von Mises. Nevertheless there also exist significant differences between the views of Ludwig von Mises and those of John Maynard Keynes with respect to probability. One of these is highlighted more particularly: where John Maynard Keynes advocated a monist view of probability, Ludwig von Mises embraced a dualist view of probability, according to which the concept of probability has two different meanings each of which is valid in a particular area or context. It is concluded that both John Maynard Keynes and Ludwig von Mises presented highly nuanced views with respect to the meaning and interpretation of probability.
    Keywords: General Methodology; Austrian Methodology; Keynesian Methodology; Quantitative and Qualitative Probability Concepts: Meaning and Interpretation; Frequency Interpretation; Logical Interpretation; John Maynard Keynes; Ludwig von Mises; Richard von Mises;
    JEL: C00 B50 B49 B00 B53 B40
    Date: 2007–03–12
  2. By: Bernard Paulré (MATISSE - Modélisation Appliquée, Trajectoires Institutionnelles et Stratégies Socio-Économiques - [CNRS : UMR8595] - [Université Panthéon-Sorbonne - Paris I])
    Abstract: Nous posons ici la question de savoir sur la base de quel modèle épistémique les économistes peuvent aborder le thème de l'information et de la connaissance. Nous opposons, ce qui est banal dans le domaine de sciences cognitives, et ne l'est pas en économie, le paradigme computationniste et le paradigme connexionniste. Le paradigme computationniste s'articule bien avec le courant orthodoxe ainsi qu'avec sa forme amoindrie qui est le paradigme néo-rationaliste Simonien. Par contre, on doit s'interroger sur la façon dont se manifeste le paradigme connexionniste en économie. Nous montrons dans ce papier que la théorie évolutionniste de la firme selon Nelson et Winter constitue en fait, sans que les auteurs semblent l'avoir voulu ou explicité, une bonne illustration de l'approche connexionniste. Nous plaidons pour un programme de recherche exploitant systématiquement le paradigme connexionniste pour l'analyse de l'entreprise.
    Keywords: information ; connaissance ; computationnisme ; connexionisme ; Simon ; Nelson ; Winter ; paradigmes ; économie de la connaissance ; évolutionnisme ; théorie de la firme ;
    Date: 2007–03–07
  3. By: Pirouz, Dante
    Abstract: While there is an extensive history of neuroscience, only recently has the theory and the methods of this discipline been applied to answer questions about decision making, choice, preference, risk and happiness. This new area of research, coined neuroeconomics, seeks to reveal more about the neural functioning and associated implications for economic and consumer behavior. In this paper are some of the key developments in neuroeconomics research as they relate to consumer decision-making, culminating with a discussion of possible future research areas in marketing where this type of research could be applied with important managerial, policy and academic implications.
    Keywords: Consumer behavior; neuroscience; neuroeconomics; decision-making; trust
    JEL: M31
    Date: 2004
  4. By: U. Witt
    Abstract: What is special about the evolutionary approach? This question is given quite different, and partly incommensurable, answers in evolutionary economics. The present paper shows how the different answers correspond with, on the one hand, the particular heuristic twists by which the corresponding authors arrive at their hypotheses (e.g. by borrowing analogies from evolutionary biology). On the other hand, the answers hinge on different ontological assumption (i.e. on whether or not evolution in nature and in the economy are viewed as belonging to the same sphere of reality and, hence, as mutually dependent processes). By distinguishing these two dimensions a road map for evolutionary economics is drawn up that helps to better understand where, and why, the competing interpretations differ. In order to assess their achievements and their potential for future research, some results of an opinion poll among evolutionary economists are presented and discussed.
    Keywords: Length 28 pages
    Date: 2007–03
  5. By: McCauley, Joseph L.
    Abstract: This article is a response to the recent “Worrying Trends in Econophysics” critique written by four respected theoretical economists [1]. Two of the four have written books and papers that provide very useful critical analyses of the shortcomings of the standard textbook economic model, neo-classical economic theory [2,3] and have even endorsed my book [4]. Largely, their new paper reflects criticism that I have long made [4,5,6,7,] and that our group as a whole has more recently made [8]. But I differ with the authors on some of their criticism, and partly with their proposed remedy.
    Keywords: General equilibrium; uncertainty; conservation laws; money nonconservation; nonintegrability of dynamical systems; financial markets; stochastic processes
    JEL: D8 C0 A2
    Date: 2006–05–29
  6. By: Maurice Marchon (IEA, HEC Montréal)
    Date: 2006–12
  7. By: dong, congcong
    Abstract: As is considered in this paper,none of the ever existing long wave theories can totally describe or correctly explain the chronic fluctuating characters of the capitalist world economy system since the year 1857. Based on Karl Marx’s greatest work “Capital” and combined with considerable quantities of historical materials such as all kinds of writings about economic long wave both at home and abroad,the paper analyzes four inherently identical waves,tries to draw a fluctuating graph of the world economy with the wavelength supposed to be 50 years,and then forecasts the future of the world.
    Keywords: economic crisis; long wave; forecasting
    JEL: E37 E32 E17 E11
    Date: 2006–02–27
    Abstract: This study provides insight into the dominant methodological practices that have shaped the field of negotiation over the past four decades, and sheds light on possible gaps and trade-offs. We content analyzed 941 peer reviewed negotiation articles (published between 1965-2004) for methodology. We distinguished key issues in negotiation research and identified methodological trends over time (1965-2004). The results reveal significant changes in reliability, validity and triangulation issues. In addition, the rise of multivariate statistics and multiple data-sources displays a positive evolution towards more sophisticated methodologies. However, more attention is needed to address the enduring lack of longitudinal designs and qualitative techniques in negotiation research. KEYWORDS: negotiation; research methodology; review; validity; triangulation
    Date: 2007–01

This nep-hpe issue is ©2007 by Erik Thomson. It is provided as is without any express or implied warranty. It may be freely redistributed in whole or in part for any purpose. If distributed in part, please include this notice.
General information on the NEP project can be found at For comments please write to the director of NEP, Marco Novarese at <>. Put “NEP” in the subject, otherwise your mail may be rejected.
NEP’s infrastructure is sponsored by the School of Economics and Finance of Massey University in New Zealand.