Schmölders rejected Hayek’s deductive economics in favor of empirical social-science methods
Evidence
In contrast to Hayek, he did not make the argument that economists could “derive from the knowledge of our own mind in an ‘a priori’ or ‘deductive’ or ‘analytic’ fashion an (at least in principle) exhaustive classification of all the possible forms of intelligible behavior.” Rather, Schmölders suggested that economists should use the means of the neighboring social sciences in order to empirically scrutinize the “predictable, regular, and to a certain degree evocable behavior that may be called quasi-instinctive or quasi-automatic.” — Dieter Plehwe, Quinn Slobodian & Philip Mirowski (eds.), Nine Lives of Neoliberalism, 329
Categorization
- XREF: Directly contrasts two founding figures of ordoliberalism/neoliberalism, showing the internal epistemological split — key for the reader’s map-building across neoliberal thinkers. — connects to: The Austrian school rejected state intervention and economic mathematization alike — Mark Blyth, Austerity: The History of a Dangerous…, 383; Schmölders rejected rational choice and homo economicus as outdated, drawing on depth psychology. — Dieter Plehwe, Quinn Slobodian & Philip Mirowski (eds.), Nine Lives of Neoliberalism, 326; German economists ignored Schmölders’s behavioral-research program — Dieter Plehwe, Quinn Slobodian & Philip Mirowski (eds.), Nine Lives of Neoliberalism, 330 (+2 more)
Broader Connections
- German economists ignored Schmölders’s behavioral-research program
#expands(0.82) — Dieter Plehwe, Quinn Slobodian & Philip Mirowski (eds.), Nine Lives of Neoliberalism, 330 - Chicago economists resisted Hayek’s Austrian methodology, demanding empirical research instead.
#corroborates(0.80) — Philip Mirowski & Dieter Plehwe (eds.), The Road from Mont Pèlerin, 734 - Empirical social science findings are dismissed as mere opinion
#corroborates(0.75)