Popper and Communitarianism: Justification and Criticism of Moral Standards

Stelzer, Harald

doi:10.1007/978-1-4020-9338-8_21

Cited by 4 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Hence, no potential empirical observation proposition could ever contradict the hypotheses of the model. As emphasized in Section 2, contradictions between theories are problematic from a critical rationalist perspective (Stelzer 2009). Thirdly, if we accept that actors and, therefore, markets cannot maximize utility, we have to ask how actors actually behave and how markets function.…”

Section: Markets According To the New Institutional Economics Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Instead, scientific knowledge is always fallible (Lakatos 1970). For that reason, critical rationalism demands that we search for contradictions (Gadenne 2006), in particular within a theory, between a theory and reality, and between theories (Stelzer 2009). According to critical rationalism, theories are not adequate when they combine contradictory assumptions because we can draw any possible conclusion from contradictory assumptions (Albert 1985).…”

Section: Market Theories From a Critical Rationalist Perspectivementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

What are markets? Selected market theories under genuine uncertainty in comparison

Schmiel

Sander

2021

J Evol Econ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Since market economies are the dominant form of regulating economic action all over the world, the question arises how markets are conceived theoretically. Answering this is relevant because we need to know how existing and hypothetical markets work in general, what they “can do”, and how one can improve the market order. There are three different market approaches that consider genuine uncertainty. According to the new institutional economics approach, markets are institutions that increase boundedly rational actors’ utility. The markets-as-institutional-arrangements approach denies that markets maximize or minimize market outcomes and argues that they enable harmony between individual and common interests. According to the political-cultural approach, markets are political arenas with conflicts between the relevant actors. Deciding reasonably for a theory requires answering whether one theory is more adequate than another. Since literature has not answered this so far, the present paper deals with this issue from a critical-rationalist perspective. It finds that the institutional economics approach is not adequate because its assumptions contradict reality and each other. In contrast, the markets-as-institutional-arrangements approach and the political-cultural approach fulfill critical-rationalist requirements. Therefore, the paper compares them and finds that there are reasons to prefer the political-cultural approach and to interpret the markets-as-institutional-arrangements approach as its special case. Referring to the political-cultural approach has different consequences for analyzing and improving the market order. Taking a political-cultural view implies, e.g., not only focusing on desirable social values and market rules but also on the relevance of interpretative frameworks and power.

show abstract

Section: Markets According To the New Institutional Economics Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Market Theories From a Critical Rationalist Perspectivementioning

confidence: 99%

What are markets? Selected market theories under genuine uncertainty in comparison

Schmiel

Sander

2021

J Evol Econ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…1 Dosavadní literaturu týkající se tématu lze rozdělit do čtyř kategorií: a) ti, kteří interpretují Poppera decisionisticky a v tomto ohledu s ním souhlasí: např. Boyle 1974 či Mettenheim 1999; b) ti, kteří interpretují Poppera decisionisticky a v tomto ohledu s ním polemizují: O'Hear 1980, Hayes 2009; c) ti, kteří interpretují Poppera decisionisticky a k plauzibilitě jeho postoje se nevyjadřují: Keuth 2005 (a snad také Miller 1999a Stelzer 2009; d) ti, kteří interpretují Poppera objektivisticky (a v tomto ohledu s ním souhlasí): Shearmur 1996, Pralongová 1999, Shearmur 2009, Naraniecki 2009 1 Za téma vděčím anonymnímu recenzentu mého předchozího článku. Viz Buráň 2019, pozn.…”

unclassified

Proč chápat Popperův kritický dualismus decisionisticky

Buráň¹

2020

filozofia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is not much in The Open Society to suggest that Karl Popper was a moral objectivist. Yet, that is exactly what he himself claimed later in life. Was the widespread "decisionistic" reading of The Open Society just a grand misunderstanding, or did Popper change his metaethical views without acknowledging it? I give reasons as to why we should hold the latter to be true. I also argue that even were the former the case, decisionism would still be more compatible with the open society ideal.

show abstract

Principles and Policies

Stelzer

2016

Philosophy of the Social Sciences

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Even though social engineering has gained a bad reputation, due to new possibilities in the information age, it may be time to reconsider Karl Popper’s conception of “piecemeal social engineering.” Piecemeal social engineering is not only an element within Popper’s open society. It also connects his political philosophy to his philosophy of science and his evolutionary epistemology. Furthermore, it seems to fit well into the search for implementation strategies for policies and social actions in the context of nonideal theory. Nevertheless, this does not necessarily undermine the need for political ideals and first-order principles, which are inhabitants of “World 3.”

show abstract

Popper and Communitarianism: Justification and Criticism of Moral Standards

Cited by 4 publications

References 2 publications

What are markets? Selected market theories under genuine uncertainty in comparison

What are markets? Selected market theories under genuine uncertainty in comparison

Proč chápat Popperův kritický dualismus decisionisticky

Principles and Policies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About