Frank Knight's Antipositivism

Abstract

Don McCloskey's Rhetoric of Economics (1983, 1985) has spawned a controversy in economic methodology over what the proper roles are for philosophy and methodology, and indeed over whether these intellectual endeavors have any role whatever in economics. That is the larger issue; on a narrower plane the controversy concerns what McCloskey calls modernism or positivism. I This recent turn in economic methodology calls to mind Frank Knight's fiery review of the book that formally introduced the logical positivism of the Vienna Circle to economists, T. W. Hutchison's Signijkance and Basic Postulates of Economic Theory, and Knight's numerous other contributions that dealt with the very issues being argued today. Knight treated these issues with a philosophical sophistication that was and is rare for an economist. The position Knight developed was uniquely his-a highly personal and original antipositivism, or to use McCloskey's term, antimodernism.Knight's views on matters of doctrine were to a large extent defined by the opposition. For as James Buchanan (1968) has observed, Knight was above all else a critic. This is perhaps especially the case in methodology and philosophy, for there Knight planted his feet firmly in opposition to a tide that swept over both philosophy and economics during the first part of this century. This was the positivist quest for science based on quantification and measurement, on empirical verification of hypotheses, and free of normative values, metaphysics, animism, and anthropomorphism.Buchanan characterizes Knight as "economist as philosopher, not economist as scientist" (1968,426). The reference is appropriate in two respects. First, Knight's approach to economic theory and methodology, as well as to political economy, was to identify and analyze underlying philosophical issues, issues that economists less inclined to philosophy would not deal with and perhaps not even see. From the very beginning of his career Knight had a strong philosophical inclination,

“A Certain Amount of ‘Recantation’”: On the Origins of Frank H. Knight's Antipositivism

“…This is the notion of "scientific economics" he had in mind when he went so far as to affirm that "there is a science of economics, a true, and even exact science, which reaches laws as universal as those of mathematics and mechanics" (Knight [1924(Knight [ ] 1935. Here, as correctly pointed out by some interpreters (Hammond 1991, Hands 2008, it is important to recall Knight's use of the term "science." In comparing economics with physical mechanics, in fact, Knight was by no means suggesting that the former could aspire to the positivistic ideal of science allegedly represented by the latter -quite the contrary.…”

“…Frank Knight's firm opposition to the strictly positivistic conception of economics -and social science in general -has been a frequent topic of discussion and debate in the literature (Asso and Fiorito 2008;Emmett 1990;Gonce 1971;Hammond 1991;Hirsh and Hirsh 1975;Hands 2008;McKinney 1977). With differences in style and emphasis, these accounts have assessed and documented Knight's crusade against the scientistic quest for social knowledge based on quantification and measurement, on empirical verification of hypotheses, and freed from normative considerations.…”

“…First, according to Knight's own recollections, it was his "sudden" realization that the arguments in favor of the concept of force in physics could be applied in favor of the "metaphysical" notions of motive and intent in economics. More generally, and this became one of Knight's lifetime themes, he came to realize that the "scientific method," as it was expounded by the positivists of his time, was inapplicable to the natural sciences as well as to economics (Hammond 1991). All this was reflected in Knight's adoption of a Poincaré-type conventionalist interpretation of scientific propositions, and in his antibehaviorist emphasis on the "evaluative" dimension of human behavior.…”

The Religion of a Skeptic: Frank H. Knight on Ethics, Spirituality, and Religion during His Iowa Years

“…In a like manner, liberal democracy for Knight was 1. For critical treatments of Knight's views on religion, ethics, and economics, see Boyd 1997;Emmett 1992Emmett , 1994Greer 2001;Hammond 1991;Kern 1988;Nelson 2001;and Raines and Jung 1986. 2. Both Frank and Minerva (his wife) Knight grew up in a moderate Disciples of Christ tradition that rejected denominationalism, emphasized what Protestants believed in common, and focused on a biblically informed practice.…”

Frank H. Knight. Le risque comme critique de l'économie politique

“…Voir cependant FONTAINE, 1999. Pour un commentaire d'économiste, voir la discussion de LANGLOIS et COSGEL, 1993, et LEROY et SINGELL, 1987, in PRADIER, 1998TEIRA SERRANO, 1997, fait le point sur les commentaires philosophiques de MCKINNEY, 1977, ainsi que EMMETT, 1992, et HAMMOND, 1991 57. De ce fait, nous ne pouvons que saluer les reconstructions, fussent-elles divergentes, comme EMMETT, 1992, p. 31. Mais les profits existent dans la réalité, et si l'économiste veut en rendre compte, il doit donc postuler un risque mathématiquement irréductible par la loi des grand nombres (et ainsi impossible à prévoir et à provisionner pour l'entrepreneur).…”