历史学派与奥地利学派经济学方法论的“范式”之争  

The Paradigm Competition of Economic Methodology between Historical School and Austrian School

作　　者：马涛[1] 王宏磊[1] 

机构地区：[1]复旦大学经济学院,上海200433

出　　处：《财经研究》2011年第7期39-47,59,共10页Journal of Finance and Economics

基　　金：国家社会科学基金资助项目(08BJL056);上海市重点学科建设项目资助(B101)

摘　　要：文章对19世纪中后期历史学派和奥地利学派之间展开的一场关于经济学方法论范式的论战进行了评析,提出论战表面上看是两派围绕历史归纳法与理性演绎法在经济学研究中的地位和作用有不同的认知而产生的争论,本质上则是主张先验理性主义还是坚持经验主义认识论的分歧:在门格尔的体系中存在着先验的经济学真理,在施穆勒的体系中否认一切先验绝对真理的存在,只承认存在着相对的、暂时的经济学真理。就方法论来说,如何将理性演绎和历史归纳两种研究范式有机完美结合,仍然是现代经济学需要探讨解决的问题。This paper analyzes the debate on the paradigm of economic methodology between historical school and Austrian school in the hte 19th century, and argues that the dispute superficially stems from the different roles of historical induction and rational deduction in economic researches, but its essence is the epistemic divergence between transcendental rauonalism and empiricism. There exist priori truths in the system of Menger which are refuted in the system of Sehmoller, Schrrloller thought that there were only＇relative and temporal economic truths. As for methodology, how to integrate historical induction and rational deduction in economic studies is still a problem in modern economics.

关 键 词：历史学派 奥地利学派 范式之争 

分 类 号：F091[经济管理—政治经济学]