WHAT GIVES ECONOMICS SCIENTIFIC STATUS? METHODOLOGICAL TRANSFORMATION IN POLITICAL ECONOMY AND ITS PRAGMATIC CONSEQUENCES

In this dissertation I attempt to answer the question: what gives economics scientific status? There are traditional competing answers to this question which also manifest economists' yearning for scientific status, due in part to the substantial methodological transformation political economy has undergone since its celebrated inception by Adam Smith. These main traditional answers, suggest that no single answer is satisfactory.;In addition to background from the history of ideas, specific case studies from the history of economic theory are examined (serving to illustrate the plausibility of these views). The examination of these case studies furnishes the most obvious objections to these views; the discussion of these objections is also inspired by interdisciplinary insights.;My examination of the main traditional competing views on the grounds for granting economics scientific status suggests that none of these views are by themselves satisfactory for conferring scientific status on economics. My proposal: some optimal combination of the weaker variants of these views may supply the conditions necessarily (though not necessary sufficient) for conferring scientific status on economics. I clarify this proposal in the fifth chapter, in which I combine the weaker fifth and sixth views into a seventh view. The exploration of the seventh view illustrates the potential stored in my proposal.;In the conclusion, I warn against the danger of endorsing the metaphysical view which merely replaces the authority of traditional (religious) gods with the authority of the gods of science. This danger can be overcome if we approach all theories critically, and choose integrity over status in scientific research.;The six traditional answers (views) to our question, which are discussed in separate chapters, are briefly: (1) methods of quantification, (2) models, (3) predictive power, (4) graphical representation, (5) psychology, and (6) politicians. Those who uphold these views claim that each one of these views can separately confer scientific status on economics. The formulation of these answers is restrictive (since each contains the word 'alone') and thus renders them seemingly implausible; hence, relevant background material is supplied before I examine them.