Dictionary of Arguments


Philosophical and Scientific Issues in Dispute
 
[german]

Screenshot Tabelle Begriffes

 

Find counter arguments by entering NameVs… or …VsName.

Enhanced Search:
Search term 1: Author or Term Search term 2: Author or Term


together with


The author or concept searched is found in the following 6 entries.
Disputed term/author/ism Author
Entry
Reference
Chicago School Friedman Mause I 107
Chicago School/Friedman: the concepts of the Second Chicago School around Milton Friedman were a reaction to the crisis in the late 1970s. The aim of the relevant policy was to free the markets from the embrace of state regulation. VsChicago School: The following three decades showed a mirror-image pattern of the 1960s to 1980s: Precisely because the liberal reforms proved successful at the beginning, deregulation was continued until it finally became apparent that market activity, especially that on the global financial markets, political regulation and control largely escaped.
VsFriedman: In the aftermath of the financial and economic crisis ((s) of 2008) there is now a broad consensus that capitalism needs a new embedding or a new politicization, which sometimes even expresses itself quite explicitly in the demand "Back to Bretton Woods".

Econ Fried I
Milton Friedman
The role of monetary policy 1968


Mause I
Karsten Mause
Christian Müller
Klaus Schubert,
Politik und Wirtschaft: Ein integratives Kompendium Wiesbaden 2018
Economics Friedman Brocker I 409
Economic theory/Friedman: Among his colleagues, Friedman, who apparently was never plagued by self-doubt, was widely regarded as the great simplifier who was able to bring economic interrelationships to the point with public appeal, but who liked to ignore the complexity arising from technical counter-arguments. KrugmanVsFriedman: Paul Krugman saw the ideologist as the third facet of Friedman's personality alongside the economist and the economic policy advisor; his public economic policy recommendations always had concerns about his intellectual seriousness (Krugman 2007) (1).
SolowVsFriedman: Robert Solow joined in. People like Friedman are bad for the economy as well as for society, and debates with them are a waste of time (Solow 2013) (2).


1 .Paul Krugman, »Who Was Milton Friedman?«, in: The New York Review of Books 54/2, 15. Februar 2007.
2. Robert M. Solow, M., »Why Is There No Milton Friedman Today?«, in: Econ Journal Watch 10/2, 2013, 214-216. Spahn, Peter, »Milton Friedman«, in: Heinz-Dieter Kurz (Hg.), Klassiker des ökonomischen Denkens, Bd. 2, München 2009, 282-300.


Peter Spahn „Milton Friedman, Kapitalismus und Freiheit“, in: Manfred Brocker (Hg.) Geschichte des politischen Denkens. Das 20. Jahrhundert. Frankfurt/M. 2018

Econ Fried I
Milton Friedman
The role of monetary policy 1968


Brocker I
Manfred Brocker
Geschichte des politischen Denkens. Das 20. Jahrhundert Frankfurt/M. 2018
Labour Markets Friedman Brocker I 402
Labour Market/Friedman: Friedman's thesis: private households would not have to participate in the exchange because they could produce for themselves if necessary (1). However, because most people lack the means of production for their own work, they have to make a living as wage earners; in fact, they do not have the option of foregoing contracts with employers. This leads to a structural imbalance of power on the labour market, which can be reflected in an unfavourable development of income distribution for the employees. Unemployment: not treated by Friedman in Capitalism and Freedom.
Friedman does not deal with Keynes' theory, according to which the market system does not tend to balance itself in the labour market. (KeynesVsFriedman).
Friedman: implicitly presupposes full employment. There are still options for employees. ((s) Full employment is not defined as an employment rate of 100%).
VsFriedman: This gives the misleading impression that a stable supply of money to the economy by the central bank is sufficient to prevent crises and economic unemployment.
FriedmanVsTrade Unions: Trade unions are the only threat to the functioning of the labour market, trade unions, since as "monopolistic" organisations they hinder companies' decision-making freedom.
SpahnVsFriedman: However, trade unions are not the cause, but the reflex of a market failure: Usually, capitalist market societies are characterized by a varying degree of underemployment. Even with "full employment", there are millions of unemployed in large economies. A nuclear, unregulated labour market would create the risk of wage and price deflation which, as in the 1930s, could undermine the stability of the macroeconomic system.
I 403
Labour market/Friedman: the ideal he has in mind: a free marketplace in which everyone seeks his advantage through supply and demand activities.

1. Milton Friedman, Capitalism and Freedom, Chicago 1962. Dt.: Milton Friedman, Kapitalismus und Freiheit, München 2004, S. 36

Peter Spahn „Milton Friedman, Kapitalismus und Freiheit“, in: Manfred Brocker (Hg.) Geschichte des politischen Denkens. Das 20. Jahrhundert. Frankfurt/M. 2018

Econ Fried I
Milton Friedman
The role of monetary policy 1968


Brocker I
Manfred Brocker
Geschichte des politischen Denkens. Das 20. Jahrhundert Frankfurt/M. 2018
Markets Friedman Brocker I 409
Markets/Friedman: in the end, the market was always right, even if it showed a bad taste. For example, private sponsors, but not the state and taxpayers, should be concerned with preserving the cultural values of an upper class of education and subsidising art and music. KeynesVsFriedman: Keynes doubted that markets always lead to meaningful social results. Keynes: It is not true that people have a normatively understood 'natural freedom' in their economic actions. […] The world is not planned in such a way that private and social interests always coincide;
Brocker I 410
and it will not be governed in a way that they will get along. (1)

1. J.M. Keynes »The End of Laissez-Faire« (1926), in: ders., Collected Writings, Bd. 9, London/Basingstoke 1972, 272-294.

Econ Fried I
Milton Friedman
The role of monetary policy 1968


Brocker I
Manfred Brocker
Geschichte des politischen Denkens. Das 20. Jahrhundert Frankfurt/M. 2018
Monetarism Friedman Brocker I 397
Monetarism/Friedman: Friedman became the founder of a "monetarist" economic policy which, due to its fixation on the money supply-inflation context and its relativization of the full employment target in the political spectrum of interests, was perceived as more right-wing and fought against by groups close to trade unions. Monetarism: A policy of steady money supply growth as a necessary and sufficient condition of macroeconomic stability, i.e. above all to preserve the value of money.
VsMonetarism: this is an apparently interest-led stabilisation strategy of capitalist economic relations that systematically limits the options for action of the factor labour: Market economy as a social order that is primarily committed to the freedom of capital.
MonetarismVsVs: this is misleading: Friedman's book Capitalism and Freedom is primarily about propagating scientific concepts and economic policy institutions that integrate politicians' decisions into a narrow regulatory system or - even better - make them superfluous. Friedman's thinking is (...) not directed against the freedom of the workers, but against the unrestricted scope for action of politicians, whose good intentions he did not necessarily doubted, but repeatedly doubted their competence. FriedmanVsFederal Banks, Trade UnionsVsFriedman.


Peter Spahn „Milton Friedman, Kapitalismus und Freiheit“, in: Manfred Brocker (Hg.) Geschichte des politischen Denkens. Das 20. Jahrhundert. Frankfurt/M. 2018

Econ Fried I
Milton Friedman
The role of monetary policy 1968


Brocker I
Manfred Brocker
Geschichte des politischen Denkens. Das 20. Jahrhundert Frankfurt/M. 2018
Political Parties Hibbs Mause I 283
Political Parties/Hibbs: The theories of electoral budget cycles regard government parties as purely opportunistic voice maximizers without their own ideological orientation. This is, of course, an idealization. (See Economic Cycle/Tufte: Tufte thesis: Before elections taxes may be lowered, after the election possibly increased again. Hibbs: systematically examined the differences in the behaviour of left and right-wing parties with regard to economic policy. (1)
Thesis: Right-wing parties, which tend to represent higher income groups, are more afraid of high inflation than high unemployment. The opposite applies to left-wing parties.
Hibb's investigation of 12 Western industrialized countries seemed to confirm that left and right-wing governments pursued a corresponding economic policy.
VsHibbs: Problem: Hibbs assumes a stable Phillips curve, i.e. a freely selectable trade-off between unemployment and inflation, which is an idealization.
FriedmanVsHibbs: such an assumption should not be assumed for rationally proactive voters. (2)
VsFriedman: Partisanship models were developed in response to this criticism, based on rationally proactive voters. (3) Thereafter, the differences between ((s) the behaviour of) left and right-wing parties are temporary and fizzle out in the course of the election cycle.
What all models have in common is that they expect left-wing governments to pursue a much more expansionary fiscal policy. (Vs: See Political Parties/Economic Theories).


1. Douglas A. Hibbs. 1977. Political parties and macroeconomic policy. American Political Science Review 71 (4): 1467– 1487.
2. Milton Friedman. 1968. The role of monetary policy. American Economic Review 58( 1): S. 1– 17.
3. Alberto Alesina, Nouriel Roubini & Gerald Cohen, Political cycles and the macroeconomy. Cambridge 1997.

EconHibbs I
Dougals A. Hibbs
Political Parties and macroeconomic policy 1977


Mause I
Karsten Mause
Christian Müller
Klaus Schubert,
Politik und Wirtschaft: Ein integratives Kompendium Wiesbaden 2018

The author or concept searched is found in the following 2 controversies.
Disputed term/author/ism Author Vs Author
Entry
Reference
Davidson, D. Friedman Vs Davidson, D. Horwich I 498
Korrespondenztheorie/Kausaltheorie der Referenz/Michael Friedman/M.Williams: (wie Boyd mit der Verläßlichkeit unserer Methoden befaßt): wenn Wissenschaft als rationales Handeln gerechtfertigt werden muss, muss es möglich sein zu zeigen, dass es eine enge Verbindung von Bestätigung und Wahrheit gibt. ((s) Lager: Friedman: „substantieller W Begriff, VsDeflationismus),. Lösung/Friedman: ein statistisches Gesetz für die Verbindung von Bestätigung und Wahrheit. Dies leiten wir von unseren psychologischen und physikalischen Theorien und den Theorien darüber, wie der Geist durch Interaktion mit der Umgebung zu Überzeugungen kommt, ab.
Friedman/M. Williams: weil er Wahrheit innerhalb von Gesetzen verlangt, scheint das einen substantiellen W Begriff zu verlangen.
DeflationismusVsFriedman/M. Williams: aber das stimmt nicht. Und das könnte auch gar nicht sein: Das Zitattilgungsschema liefert die Mittel für semantischen Aufstieg und auch semantischen Abstieg: d.h. Wahrheit kann immer wegparaphrasiert werden. So kann man Friedman paraphrasieren. Bsp
Für jedes p, wenn p durch unsere Methoden bestätigt wird, dann wahrscheinlich p.
((s) ohne Wahrheit).
M. Williams: das involviert Quantifikation über Propositionen oder Sätze (statements). Verwandt mit „Alles was er sagte“, und dafür gibt es ähnliche konventionelle Lösungen.
Wahrheit/FriedmanVs: kann damit aber nicht ad acta gelegt werden: das Zitattilgungsschema allein zeigt nicht den Sprachgebrauch (s.o.).
Kompositionalität/W Theorie/Friedman: These WT verlangt eine kompositionale WT.
Wahrheit/Deflationismus/M. Williams: das heißt aber nicht, dass ein reicherer (substantieller) W Begriff benötigt wird! Das zeigt der Fall von Davidson (s.o.).
Selbst Validierung/Selbst Bestätigung/Überzeugung//Wissenschaft/FriedmanVsDavidson/M. Williams: Friedman These: Selbst Validierung ist möglich. Aber dazu darf nicht angenommen werden, dass unsere Erklärung, wie Referenz bestimmt ist, von vornherein garantiert, dass unsere Überzeugungen wahr sind.
Pointe: d.h. dass Friedman keinen substantiellen W Begriff aus der Tatsache herleitet, dass Wahrheit in Gesetzen vorkommt. (?).
Statt dessen argumentiert er für einen „realistischen“ Ansatz .für Referenz.
I 499
substantieller W Begriff/Friedman: ist dann ein Abfallprodukt davon! Selbst Validierung/Friedman/Zirkel/M. Williams: erscheint zirkulär, weil wir die Methoden gebrauchen, die bestätigt werden sollen.
Ähnlich;:
VsPutnam: Kausaltheorie der Referenz: setzt die Verläßlichkeit voraus, die sie erklären will.
Lösung/PutnamVsVs: es ist nur eine Art „Check der Konsistenz“.
Lösung/Friedman/M. Williams: es ist kein Zirkel, weil nicht von vornherein garantiert ist, dass es unsere besten Theorien sind, die die Verläßlichkeit garantieren.
Wissenschaft/Friedman: eine wichtige Aufgabe ist es zu zeigen, wie Wissenschaft nicht ihre eigene Belegbasis unterminieren kann. Wie Quine sagt:
Wissenschaft/Quine: verteidigt sich von innen, gegen ihre Selbstzweifel.
Friedman/M. Williams: das sieht so aus, als ob Friedman Raum für einen allgemeinen Skeptizismus schafft. Das wird klar wenn er unterscheidet:
a) Kausaltheorien der Referenz
b) Theorien die auf dem Prinzip der Nachsicht basieren, (Davidson).
Referenz/Davidson/M. Williams: nach Davidson ist die Zuschreibung von Referenten eine Sache der Methode unserer Interpretation.
Verläßlichkeit: d.h. dass wir auf Dinge referieren, über die wir verläßlich berichten können ist keine empirische Tatsache, die wir aus „unseren besten Theorien“ ableiten.
Kausaltheorie/Referenz/Friedman: dagegen: spezifiziert Referenz durch Überlegungen, die unabhängig von Wahrheit oder Falschheit der Sätze die wir zufällig akzeptieren, sind.
Überzeugung/FriedmanVsDavidson: das läßt die Möglichkeit offen, dass die meisten (oder alle) unserer Überzeugungen falsch sein könnten.
I 500
Wahrheit/Friedman: dann haben wir etwas signifikantes (substantielles?) gezeigt, wenn wir zeigen, dass unsere Methoden meist wahre Überzeugungen liefern. Aber das geht nur mit der Kausaltheorie, denn sie erlaubt diese selbst kritische Kraft, die am Ende die Selbst Rechtfertigung liefert. Skeptizismus/Friedman/M. Williams: diese Selbstkorrektur ermöglicht Friedman dadurch, dass er allgemeinen Skeptizismus zuläßt.
M. WilliamsVsFriedman: das ist pervers, so wie man eine Krankheit erwirbt aus Freude daran, sie zu kurieren. Außerdem setzt er eine Menge voraus, z.B. die Existenz „unserer induktiven Methoden“, oder die kausale Definition von Referenz.

Econ Fried I
Milton Friedman
The role of monetary policy 1968

Horwich I
P. Horwich (Ed.)
Theories of Truth Aldershot 1994
Friedman, M. Fraassen Vs Friedman, M. I 109
Theory/Fraassen: it could be argued that a theory as a whole needs to have more properties than just acceptability. Local Property/Theory/Friedman: E.g. that a theory explains a particular fact
Global Property/Theory/Friedman: Science teaches more a global than a local understanding, it’s not about understanding individual phenomena. (FN 15).
Explanation/Friedman: relation "theory T explains phenomenon P": in general regularities, which are represented by law-like sentences.
I 110
K: is a set of law-like sentences (background theory) S: a candidate for an explanation (law, theory, hypothesis) of P
P: can itself be represented by law-like sentences.
Def Explanation/Friedman: S explains P iff. P is a consequence S, relative to K, and S "reduces" or "unifies" the set of its own consequences relative to K.
Def Relative Consequence/Friedman/Fraassen: A is a consequence of B relative to K iff. A is consequence of a B and K together.
FraassenVsFriedman: he has to modify the concept "reduces" in the following, and then he does not do anymore what Friedman needs. (FN 16).
Explanation/Friedman/Fraassen: interesting about his approach: we evaluate an explanandum relative to a background K.
1) Suppose a theory contained additional information that is not law-like, E.g. the age of the universe (boundary condition), but of course it cannot contain all our knowledge.
2) relative to K implies that P (the sentence about the phenomenon) is true. I suppose that Friedman wants to weaken this Hempel-like condition in the sense of Salmon (The probability does not have to be high).
3) Problem: it is the character of K plus additional information, considered as a complex theory, that determines whether we have an explanation. ((s) I.e. it would depend on accidental previous knowledge or the age of the universe, if something is an explanation).

Fr I
B. van Fraassen
The Scientific Image Oxford 1980