Journals / Abant Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi / 2023 / Cilt: 23 Sayı: 2

A Critical Examination of the Ontology of Economic Models Based on the The Case of Austria Business Cycle Model

Avusturya İş Çevrim Modelinden Hareketle Ekonomik Modellerin Ontolojisi Üzerine Eleştirel Bir Değerlendirme

Pages
813–826
Publication Date
2023-07-31
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Lastly, by means of a case study, it is argued that ontology of economic models should not necessarily be taken in the context of the dichotomic treatment of models as isolations and constructions.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Although economic models are the most important part of the economic practice, studies on the ontology of them seem to be rather limited.
📊
Key Findings & Data:There are two main approaches regarding the ontology of economic models.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Lastly, by means of a case study, it is argued that ontology of economic models should not necessarily be taken in the context of the dichotomic treatment of models as isolations and constructions.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Ekonomik Modeller · Ontoloji · İzolasyoncu Yaklaşım

Abstract

Although economic models are the most important part of the economic practice, studies on the ontology of them seem to be rather limited. There are two main approaches regarding the ontology of economic models. According to fictionalism, the relationship between economic models and the real world is limited as they are parallel worlds that are constructed for the modeller herself. According to isolationism, economic models are similar to real experiments, they are meant to isolate causal factors and mechanisms that are responsible for the occurrence of the economic phenomena. First in the economic practice how economic models are understood is represented. Then, fictionalist and isolationist approaches are critically examined. Lastly, by means of a case study, it is argued that ontology of economic models should not necessarily be taken in the context of the dichotomic treatment of models as isolations and constructions.

Özet

Ekonomik modellerin ekonomi pratiğinin işleyişinin en önemli bileşenleri olduğu halde bu yapıların ontolojik statüsü ile ilgili çalışmalar sınırlı kalmıştır. Ekonomik modellerin ontolojisi ile ilgili temel olarak iki yaklaşımdan söz edilebilir. Kurgucu yaklaşıma göre ekonomik modeller gerçek dünya ile ilgisi sınırlı olan, modelleyenlerin kendileri için kurguladıkları düşünsel, paralel dünyalardır. İzolasyoncu yaklaşıma göre ekonomik modeller, ekonomik fenomenin ortaya çıkmasına neden olan temel nedenleri ya da nedensel mekanizmaları izole etmeye yarayan, gerçek deneylere benzeyen yapılardır. Bu makalede öncelikle ekonomik modellerin ekonomi pratiği bağlamında nasıl değerlendirildiği ele alınmaktadır. Ardından ekonomik modellerin ontolojisi ile ilgili temel iki yaklaşım olan kurgucu ve izolasyoncu yaklaşımların çerçeveleri eleştirel bir yaklaşımla çizilmektedir. Son olarak ekonomik modellerin zorunlulukla kurgucu ya da izolasyoncu ikiliği temelinde ele alınmaması gerektiği bir durum çalışması aracılığı ile iddia edilmektedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

ÇEVİK, A. D. (2023). A Critical Examination of the Ontology of Economic Models Based on the The Case of Austria Business Cycle Model. Abant Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, Cilt: 23 Sayı: 2, 813–826. https://ajindex.com/articles/956471

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (19)

  1. Akerlof, G. A. (1970), The Market for "Lemons,” Quality Uncertainty and the Market Mechanism. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 84, No. 3, s. 488-500.
  2. Banerjee, A. V. (1992), A simple model for herd behavior. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 107(3), s. 797- 817. Begg, D. & Vernasca, G., Fischer, S. & DornBusch, R. (2011), Economics, 10th Edition.
  3. McGraw-Hill. Birchler, U., Butler, M. (2007), Information Economics. New‐York. Bird, A. and Tobin, E. (2022), “Natural Kinds.” The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2022 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL =. Erişim Tarihi: 14.09.2022.
  4. Boland, L. A. (1979), A Critique of Friedman's Critics. Journal of Economic Literature, Vol. 17, No. 2, s. 503-522.
  5. Boland, L. A. (1989), The Methodology of Economic Model Building, London and New York: Routledge, Boumans, M. & Morgan, M.S. (2001), Ceteris paribus conditions: Materiality and the application of economic theories. Journal of Economic Methodology, 8 (1), s. 11-26.
  6. Callender, C. and J. Cohen (2006), There is no special problem about scientific representation. Theoria 21 (1), s. 67–85.
  7. Cartwright, N. (1989), Nature’s Capacities and Their Measurement. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  8. Cartwright, N. (1999), The Dappled World. A Study of the Boundaries of Science. Cambridge University Press.
  9. Cartwright, N. (2009), If No Capacities Then No Credible Worlds.But Can Models Reveal Capacities?, Erkenntnis 70 (1), s. 45-58
  10. Cartwright, N. (2010), Models: Parables v Fables. Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science, 262, s. 19–31.
  11. Casini, L. (2014), Not-so-minimal models. Between isolation and imagination. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 44, s. 646-672.
  12. Çevik, A. D. (2022), Bilimsel İdealizasyonlar. Mediterranean Journal of Humanities XII, s. 11-23.
  13. French, S. (2010). Keeping quiet on the ontology of models. Synthese 172 (2), s. 231–249.
  14. French, S. (2017). Identity conditions, idealisations and isomorphisms: a defence of the Semantic Approach. Synthese 198, s. 5897–5917.
  15. Fumagalli, R. (2015), No Learning From Minimal Models. Philosophy of Science, 82 (5), s. 798-809.
  16. Fumagalli, R. (2016), Why We Cannot Lean From Minimal Models. Erkenntnis, 81 (3), s. 433-455.
  17. Frigg, R. (2010), Models and fiction. Synthese 172 (2), s. 251–268.
  18. Garrison, R. W. (2001), Time and Money. New York: Routledge. Gibbard, A. and R. Varian, H. R. (1978), Economic Models. The Journal of Philosophy, Vol. 75, No.11 s. 664-677.
  19. Godfrey-Smith, P. (2006), The strategy of model-based science. Bi