Evaluating Competing Explanatory Games in Economics

This erudite book examines the theory of explanatory games. Jonas G. Lipski argues for a comparative approach to the philosophy of economics, applying theoretical ideas to central controversies in the field.

Evaluating Competing Explanatory Games in Economics addresses key contemporary issues around mainstream economics, advocating for a naturalistic approach towards philosophy of science that is focused on applicability. He argues that in accordance with these criteria, the theory of explanatory games is the best available approach vis a vis competing general approaches to philosophy of science. Focusing on explanatory practices in economics, Lipski highlights the different rules that economists follow in constructing explanations, emphasizing the need for these to be critically and comparatively evaluated. He argues that economics is a field in which explanatory games with different rules compete with one another. Using examples from growth theory and the Socialist Calculation Debate as case studies, he further argues that some marginalized perspectives - specifically the Austrian School or New institutional Economics - have distinct advantages over the approaches that historically came to be accepted by the majority of economists.



A vital resource for students and academics in economics and philosophy, this book's novel insights into the theory of explanation and comparative economic theory will also greatly benefit economists and philosophers.