This paper examines A.R.J. Turgot's explanation of the scope and method of economic science. We begin by highlighting two contradictory economic methodologies in Turgot's writings according to the literature: one in his text on progress and another in his papers on concrete economic matters. An initial hypothesis in this paper holds that this ‘contradiction' does not exist. To do so, we shall use his texts on scientific methodology, history of science and epistemology, mainly written during the decade of the fifties. The argument is that his taxonomy of sciences explains that the different methodologies observed by the literature, depending on the discipline, are the forms that the unit of science can take in each stage of the progress of the human spirit. A corollary to this hypothesis is that Turgot's multi-disciplinary works describe a scene of the birth of economic science that is very removed from the political arena. Both debates on types of knowledge, the independence of disciplines, the specialized language and the association of authors are better explained from the sociology of science than from the history of political thought
Nach Informationen von SSRN wurde die ursprüngliche Fassung des Dokuments October 27, 2015 erstellt
Other identifiers:
10.2139/ssrn.2729184 [DOI]
Classification:
B31 - Individuals ; B10 - History of Economic Thought through 1925. General ; Z13 - Social Norms and Social Capital ; B11 - Preclassical ; B41 - Economic Methodology