Rethinking the Formalism-Substantivism Debate in Social Science: A Perspective from Recent Developments in Economic Methodology

Abstract

Taking as its point of departure the 1960s formalism-substantivism debate in social science methodology, this article argues that what is distinctive about the new development of formalism in economics since then is mainly the prevalence of using “complete models”—tractable, manipulable, and fully specified mathematical objects—to construct and express theories. The objective of complete models is not to establish general laws, but to formulate auxiliary devices of cognition to facilitate the explanation of targeted aspects of the empirical world; not to create idealistic or ideological discourses, but to derive implications with empirically delimited utility—this in order to make inferences that cannot be achieved via purely qualitative methods. This methodological trend is to some extent a substantivization of formalist economics. Exploring its nature can help clarify the unique cognitive value of contemporary formalism and answer the question of why substantivism is still an irreplaceable approach to social scientific studies, even in an age dominated by formalism.