Abstract
Methodological individualism, coupled with radical subjectivity, leads naturally to skepticism regarding the objective theoretical value of economic aggregates. I restate the role of aggregates in the methodological individualist paradigm, focusing on the Austrian tradition, in a way consistent with Hodgson’s (2007) critique and emphasize belief and meaning as the relevant channel through which these aggregates operate. Viewing aggregates this way leads to a relational approach which is consistent with formulations made by scholars working within in the methodological individualist paradigm and answers Hodgson’s call for recognition of the importance of interactive relations between individuals.
Reference63 articles.
1. Aligica, P. D., & Evans, A. J. (2009). Thought Experiments, Counterfactuals and Comparative Analysis. Review of Austrian Economics, 22(3), 225-239. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11138-009-0082-8
2. Avramov, D. (2002). Stock Return Predictability and Model Uncertainty. Journal of Financial Economics, 64(3), 423-458. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-405X(02)00131-9
3. Axtell, R. L. (2007). What Economic Agents Do: How Cognition and Interaction lead to Emergence and Complexity. Review of Austrian Economics, 20(2), 105-122. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11138-007-0021-5
4. Bismans, F., & Mougeot, C. (2009). Austrian Business Cycle Theory: Empirical Evidence. Review of Austrian Economics, 22(3), 241-257. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11138-009-0084-6
5. Boettke, P. J. (1990). Interpretive Reasoning and the Study of Social Life. Methodus: Bulletin of the International Network for Economic Method, 2(2), 35-45.