Open Access
Austrian and mainstream economics : how do they differ?
Loading...
Files
Ekonomista2018-2-strony-90-119.pdf (377.94 KB)
Full-text in Open Access, Published version
License
Cadmus Permanent Link
Full-text via DOI
ISBN
ISSN
0013-3205; 2299-6184
Issue Date
Type of Publication
LC Subject Heading
Other Topic(s)
EUI Research Cluster(s)
Initial version
Published version
Succeeding version
Preceding version
Published version part
Earlier different version
Initial format
Author(s)
Citation
Ekonomista, 2018, No. 2, pp. 209-238
Cite
PIENIAZEK, Piotr, Austrian and mainstream economics : how do they differ?, Ekonomista, 2018, No. 2, pp. 209-238 - https://hdl.handle.net/1814/60022
Abstract
In the aftermath of the 2008 financial and economic crisis, mainstream economics (ME) was accused of being unable to predict, prevent, and alleviate it. In this situation, one might be curious if alternatives to mainstream economics are of any value. The aim of this paper is to answer whether the theory of the Austrian school of economics (ASE) can be considered a serious alternative to ME. This is done by examining its methodology and especially its attitude towards the use of mathematics in economic theory. Some shortcomings of the ASE's methodology are considered that make it a less attractive alternative than might initially be assumed. Next, the arguments of the ASE economists against the use of mathematics in economics are reviewed careful examination indicates that they are not sound. All of this shows that the ASE cannot be considered a serious alternative to ME. Finally, this conclusion is illustrated with a comparison of methods with which theories of business cycles are arrived at and analyzed in the two approaches.