УВАГА! Нова платформа наукового журналу «SCIENTIA FRUCTUOSA».
Перейти за посиланням -  http://journals.knute.edu.ua/scientia-fructuosa/

EPISTEMOLOGY OF ECONOMICS OF THE TWENTY FIRST CENTURY

Автор: Sveta on .

Cite as APA style citation
Lagutin V. Epistemologija ekonomichnoi' nauky XXI stolittja. Visnyk Kyi'vs'kogo nacional'nogo torgovel'no-ekonomichnogo universytetu. 2021. №2. S. 38-53.

FREE FULL TEXT (PDF)
DOI:  http://doi.org/10.31617/visnik.knute.2021(136)03

UDC 165:330.1”20”
JEL Classification: A10, A12, B41, E13

LAGUTIN Vasyl,
Doctor of Economics, Professor, Head of the Department of Economics and Competition Policy
Kyiv National University of Trade and Economics
Kyoto str., 19, Kyiv, 02156, Ukraine

E-mail:   Ця електронна адреса захищена від спам-ботів. вам потрібно увімкнути JavaScript, щоб побачити її.
ORCID: https//orcid.org/0000-0001-6626-4381

EPISTEMOLOGY OF ECONOMICS OF THE TWENTY FIRST CENTURY

 Background. Uptake of new epistemological and methodological norms, theoretical standards, methods of conceptualization is the most pressing issue of economics at the begi­nning of the twenty first century. Laying of modern epistemological foundations of eco­nomics, providing real knowledge about the research subject is a topical problem in these conditions.
The aim of the article is to study epistemology as one of the defining modern approaches to the analysis of economics of the twenty first century.
Materials and methods. General and special methods of theoretical analysis as well as synergetic tools of economic methodology are used. We also used system method, scientific abstraction, qualitative structural generalization; logical, historical and inter­disciplinary approaches in the article.
Results. The main functional purpose of economic epistemology is to provide favo­rable methodological conditions for the researchers’ activity in the development of science. Economic research should be based on certain epistemological and methodological appro­aches. The most important are relationship between research fundamentals and applied analysis; consideration of deep socio-economic processes based on the selection of synergetic links; allocation of value as a fundamental category of research; "exit" in the applied field to management problems. Reflection becomes an important methodological form in economics. Economics has a nonlinear emergent epistemological space, which is characterized by spe­cific models of subject perception, value codes of economic culture, ethical and intellectual practices. Neoclassicism is the basis of modern economics mainstream.
Conclusion. Scientific knowledge has a clearly defined epistemological status. Epis­temology of the study provides a holistic definition of the subject of economics, and explains the content and scientific logic of relevant transformations analysis. Uptake of new episte­mological and methodological norms, theoretical standards, methods of conceptualization and research methods is the most pressing issue of economics at the beginning of the twenty first century. 
Keywords: economic epistemology, methodology, economic culture, paradigm, economic categories, value, neoclassicism, mainstream.

REFERENCES

  1. Gejec’, V. (2018). Ekonomichnu praktyku – na naukove pidg’runtja [Economic practice – on a scientific basis]. Ekonomika Ukrai’ny – Economy of Ukraine, 10, 3-9[in Ukrainian]. 
  2. Zvjerjakov, M. (2018). Teoretychna paradygma stalogo rozvytku ta ukrai’ns’ki realii’ [Theoretical paradigm of sustainable development and Ukrainian realities]. Ekonomika Ukrai’ny –EconomyofUkraine, 10, 10-31 [inUkrainian].
  3. Olsen, N. (2018). The Sovereign Consumer: A New Intellectual History of Neo­liberalism. Springer. Palgrave Macmillan [in English]. 
  4. Reiss, J. (2014). Struggling over the Soul of Economics: Objectivity versus Expertise. C. Martini & M. Boumans (Ed). Experts and Consensus in social science. Р. 131-152. Springer International Publishing. Retrieved from https: // doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-08551-77[in English]. 
  5. Tarasevych, V. (2018). Problematyka istyny u svitovij ekonomichnij nauci [Proble­matics of the truth in the world economic science]. Ekonomika Ukrai’ny –  Economy of Ukraine, 10, 88-100 [in Ukrainian]. 
  6. Umanciv, Ju. (2019). Ekonomichna teorija u novitn’omu metodologichnomu dyskursi [Economic theory in the latest methodological discourse]. Visnyk Kyi’v. nac. torg-ekon. un-tu – HeraldofKyivNationalUniversityofTrade andEconomics,2, 51-63 [in Ukrainian]. 
  7. Hausman, D., McPherson, & Satz, D. (2017). Economic Analysis, Moral Philosophy and Public Policy. Cambridge [in English].
  8. Ponthiere, G. (2019-2020). Philosophy and epistemology of the economics. Retrieved from https://sites.uclouvain.be/archives-portail/cdc2019/en-cours-2019-LECON2061[in English]. 
  9. Soler, L. (2009). An introduction to epistemology. Paris. Ellipses [in English]. 
  10. Fevre, R. (2020). Power as en epistemological obstacle. Walter Eucken’s quest for an interest-proof economic science. The Journal of Economic Methodology.  (Vol. 27). Is. 4, 330-350[in English]. 
  11. Filipenko, A. (2017). Ekonomichnyj svit: metodologija [Economic world: metho­dology]. Ekonomichna teorija –Economic theory, 3, 5-22 [inUkrainian]. 
  12. Oxford handbook of philosophy of economics (2009).  H. Kincaid and D. Ross(Eds.).New York: Oxford University Press [in English]. 
  13. Taleb, N. N. (2007). The Black Swan: The Impact of the Highly Improbable. London: Penguin [in English].
  14. Popper, K. (1969). Science: Conjectures and Refutations. Conjectures and Refutations: The Growth of Scientific Knowledge. London: Routledge [in English].
  15. North, D. C. (1990).  Institutions, institutional change and economic performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press [in English].
  16. Olson, M. (1982). The Rise and Decline of Nations: Economic Growth, Stagflation and Social Rigidities. Yale University Press [in English]. 
  17. Boyer, P., & Petersen, M. (2012). The naturalness of (many) social institutions: Evol­ved cognition as their foundation. Journal of Institutional Economics. (Vol. 8), 1, 1-25[in English]. 
  18. Akerlof, Dzh., & Shiller, R. (2011). Spiritus Animalis, ili Kak chelovecheskaja psiho­logija upravljaet jekonomikoj i pochemu jeto vazhno dlja mirovogo kapitalizma [Spi­ritus Animalis: How Human Psychology Drives the Economy, and Why It Matters for Global Capitalism]. Moscow: Al’pina Biznes Buks [in Russian]. 
  19. Krychevs’ka, T. O. (2020). Logiko-istorychnyj rozvytok instytutu doviry u groshovo-kredytnij sferi [Logical and historical development of the institution of trust in the monetary sphere]. Extended abstract of Doctor`s thesis. Kyiv: DU "Instytut ekonomiky ta prognozuvannja NAN Ukrai’ny" [in Ukrainian]. 
  20. Camerer, C., Issacharoff, S., Loewenstein, G., O’Donoghue, T., & Rabin, M. (2003).Regula­tion for Conservatives: Behavioral Economics and The Case for "Asymmetric Pater­nalism". University of Pennsylvania Law Review. (Vol. 151), 1, 1211-1254 [in English].
  21. Kuhn, T. (1970). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press [in English]. 
  22. Kant, I. (1999). Kritika chistogo razuma [Critique of Pure Reason]. Moscow: Nauka [in Russian]. 
  23. Boumans, M., & Davis, J. (2010). Economics Methodology: Understanding Economics as a Sciene. London. Routledge [in English].
  24. Zang, V.-B. (1999). Sinergeticheskaja jekonomika. Vremja i peremeny v nelinejnoj jeko­nomicheskoj teorii [Synergetic Economics: Time and Change in Nonlinear Economics]. Moscow: Mir [in Russian].
  25. Avtonomov, V., & Avtonomov, Y. (2019). Four Methodenstreits between Behavioral and mainstream economics. The Journal of Economic Methodology. (Vol. 26), 3, 179-194[in English]. 
  26. Syll, L. P. (2016). On the Use and Misuse of Theories and Models in Mainstream Eco­nomics. London: College Publications [in English].