|
-
<< Back to editing
-
Previous version by
-
-
<< Older
-
Newer >>
-
Revert to this one
search results
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
/index.php?action=ajax&rs=GDMgetPage&rsargs[]=laissezfaire28_2.pdf&rsargs[]=0
__________________________________________________________________
William
Barnett
II
and
Walter
Block
Economic
Categorization
I
.
Introduction
.
Classification
is
the
essence
of
the
sciences
of
biology
and
chemistry
.
Without
the
genus
and
species
concepts
of
the
former
,
and
the
periodical
table
of
elements
of
the
latter
,
these
disciplines
would
be
very
different
enterprises
.
While
it
is
of
course
a
wild
exaggeration
to
say
that
biological
and
chemical
science
consists
of
no
more
than
cataloging
,
even
contemplating
this
notion
is
a
dramatic
way
of
underscoring
the
crucial
centrality
of
this
mode
of
analysis
to
those
bodies
of
learning
.
In
economics
,
matters
are
different
.
There
is
relatively
little
emphasis
on
sorting
the
various
elements
of
the
dismal
science
.
However
,
it
is
our
contention
that
taxonomy
is
important
in
this
realm
as
well
.
1
The
present
paper
is
devoted
to
a
sorting
out
of
the
different
elements
of
the
dismal
science
.
In
section
II
we
tackle
the
question
of
how
the
disciplines
,
and
the
schools
of
thought
are
to
be
characterized
.
Section
III
is
devoted
to
a
deconstruction
of
Austrian
economics
.
In
sec-
tion
IV
we
deal
with
an
objection
to
our
thesis
.
We
conclude
in
section
V
.
II
.
Classification
schemes
.
1
.
The
Journal
of
Economic
Literature
.
Perhaps
we
do
best
to
start
with
the
mainstream
JEL
categorization
in
this
regard
.
Here
,
the
disciplines
of
economics
are
broken
down
as
follows
:
A
-
General
Economics
and
Teaching
B
-
Schools
of
Economic
Thought
and
Methodology
C
-
Mathematical
and
Quantitative
Methods
D
-
Microeconomics
E
-
Macroeconomics
and
Monetary
Economics
F
-
International
Economics
G
-
Financial
Economics
H
-
Public
Economics
I
-
Health
,
Education
,
and
Welfare
J
-
Labor
and
Demographic
Economics
K
-
Law
and
Economics
L
-
Industrial
Organization
M
-
Business
Administration
and
Business
Economics
;
Marketing
;
Accounting
1
Rothbard
(
2004
,
Ch
.
13
)
places
great
emphasis
on
classification
with
regard
to
taxation
and
other
violent
interventions
into
the
market
.
See
also
Lavoie
(
1982
,
pp
.
169-83
)
and
Ikeda
(
1997
,
pp
.
245-47
)
in
this
regard
.
For
another
classificationist
approach
see
Block
and
Cwik
(
2007
).
William
Barnett
II
is
Chase
Distinguished
Professor
of
International
Business
and
Professor
of
Economics
,
and
Walter
Block
is
Harold
E
.
Wirth
Eminent
Scholar
and
Professor
of
Economics
,
both
at
the
College
of
Business
Administration
,
Loyola
University
,
New
Orleans
.
__________________________________________________________________
Laissez-Faire
4
/index.php?action=ajax&rs=GDMgetPage&rsargs[]=laissezfaire28_2.pdf&rsargs[]=1
__________________________________________________________________
N
-
Economic
History
O
-
Economic
Development
,
Technological
Change
,
and
Growth
P
-
Economic
Systems
Q
-
Agricultural
and
Natural
Resource
Economics
R
-
Urban
,
Rural
,
and
Regional
Economics
Z
-
Other
Special
Topics
There
is
no
controversy
within
the
neoclassical
economics
world
over
this
breakdown
.
This
is
remarkable
,
in
that
argument
and
debate
are
part
and
parcel
of
the
dismal
science
.
2
However
,
Austrian
economists
3
have
more
misgivings
about
this
than
others
.
Not
,
we
hasten
to
say
,
about
the
very
idea
of
breaking
down
the
larger
world
of
economics
into
its
constituent
elements
.
If
there
is
any
chance
of
successfully
wrestling
complexity
,
it
can
only
be
done
through
a
“
divide
and
conquer
”
procedure
:
taking
things
a
small
bit
at
a
time
.
However
,
the
JEL
categorization
ignores
several
Austrian
insights
.
There
are
several
leading
theoreticians
of
this
school
of
thought
who
have
weighed
in
on
this
matter
.
Consider
the
following
.
According
to
Mises
(
1998
,
p
.
874
):
4
2
There
being
none
,
let
us
offer
several
:
this
schema
does
not
make
comfortable
room
for
experimental
economics
,
behavioral
economics
,
and
the
interdisciplinary
overlap
between
economics
and
several
other
subject
matters
,
such
as
biology
(
bio-economics
)
and
psychology
(
psychological
economics
).
3
To
be
intensively
discussed
below
.
At
this
point
let
us
content
ourselves
by
saying
that
the
Austrian
school
features
the
contributions
of
Menger
(
1950
),
Bohm
Bawerk
(
1959
),
Mises
(
1998
)
and
Rothbard
(
2004
).
4
We
owe
this
cite
to
Gérard
Dréan
.
Economics
does
not
allow
of
any
breaking
up
into
special
branches
.
It
invariably
deals
with
the
interconnectedness
of
all
the
phenomena
of
action
.
The
catallactic
problems
cannot
become
visible
if
one
deals
with
each
branch
of
production
separately
.
It
is
impossible
to
study
labor
and
wages
without
studying
implicitly
commodity
prices
,
interest
rates
,
profit
and
loss
,
money
and
credit
,
and
all
the
other
major
problems
.
The
real
problems
of
the
determination
of
wage
rates
cannot
even
be
touched
in
a
course
on
labor
.
There
are
no
such
things
as
“
economics
of
labor
”
or
“
economics
of
agriculture
.”
There
is
only
one
coherent
body
of
economics
.
In
the
view
of
Rothbard
:
5
…
economics
has
become
appallingly
fragmented
,
dissociated
to
such
a
degree
that
there
hardly
is
an
economics
any
more
;
instead
,
we
find
myriad
bits
and
pieces
of
uncoordinated
analysis
.
Economics
has
,
first
,
been
fragmented
into
“
applied
”
fields
—“
urban
land
economics
,”
“
agricultural
economics
,”
“
labor
economics
,”
“
public
finance
economics
,”
etc
.,
each
division
largely
heedless
of
the
others
.
More
grievous
still
has
been
the
disintegration
of
what
has
been
confined
to
the
category
of
“
economic
theory
.”
Utility
theory
,
monopoly
theory
,
international
trade
theory
,
etc
.,
down
to
linear
programming
and
games
theory
—
each
moves
in
its
sharply
isolated
compartment
,
with
its
own
hyperrefined
literature
.
Recently
,
growing
awareness
of
this
fragmentation
has
led
to
vague
“
interdisciplinary
”
admixtures
with
all
the
other
“
social
sciences
.”
Confusion
has
been
worse
confounded
,
with
resulting
invasive
forays
of
numerous
other
disciplines
into
economics
,
rather
than
the
diffusion
of
economics
elsewhere
.
At
any
rate
,
it
is
somewhat
foolhardy
to
attempt
to
inte-
5
http
://
www
.
mises
.
org
/
rothbard
/
mes
/
preface
.
asp
(
preface
to
the
revised
edition
,
1993
).
We
are
indebted
to
David
Gordon
for
this
quote
.
__________________________________________________________________
Laissez-Faire
5
/index.php?action=ajax&rs=GDMgetPage&rsargs[]=laissezfaire28_2.pdf&rsargs[]=2
__________________________________________________________________
grate
economics
with
everything
else
before
economics
has
itself
been
made
whole
.
Only
then
will
the
proper
place
of
economics
among
the
other
disciplines
become
manifest
.
Here
is
Rogge
’
s
(
1979
,
pp
.
211-12
)
take
on
the
matter
:
6
I
would
be
prepared
to
argue
that
the
practice
of
breaking
up
this
useful
discipline
into
agricultural
economics
,
transportation
economics
,
development
economics
,
labor
economics
,
urban
economics
,
etc
.,
has
been
productive
of
much
mischief
.
Behind
the
shield
of
special
circumstances
and
special
knowledge
,
theories
have
been
developed
and
given
wide
acceptance
that
would
be
regarded
as
patently
absurd
if
they
were
put
as
a
general
model
;
policies
have
been
developed
and
urged
upon
society
that
would
be
recognizably
catastrophic
if
applied
generally
.
Now
consider
some
specifics
.
First
,
macroeconomics
,
proper
macroeconomics
that
is
,
is
but
a
branch
or
an
implication
or
application
of
microeconomics
.
Austrian
Business
Cycle
Theory
(
ABCT
)
is
based
on
disaggregated
(
or
at
least
far
more
disaggregated
)
considerations
,
ideally
on
the
choices
of
individuals
,
in
sharp
contrast
to
the
Keynesian
and
monetarist
schools
,
which
sever
micro
from
macro
.
The
JEL
system
works
well
,
then
,
for
these
schools
of
thought
,
7
but
not
for
the
Austrians
.
6
We
thank
Rich
Wilcke
for
pointing
us
in
the
direction
of
this
quote
.
7
According
to
Milton
Friedman
(
Ebeling
,
1974
,
p
.
3
)
“
…
there
was
no
such
thing
as
‘
Austrian
Economics
,’
only
good
economics
and
bad
economics
.”
Continues
Ebeling
:
“(
This
is
)
…
a
rather
unusual
statement
,
because
just
a
few
weeks
before
he
had
been
on
public
television
and
spent
several
minutes
explaining
the
special
characteristics
of
‘
Chi-
Second
,
this
applies
too
,
to
the
severing
of
international
trade
from
the
domestic
variety
.
For
traditional
economists
,
there
is
all
the
world
of
difference
between
the
two
.
For
the
Austrians
,
apart
from
obvious
institutional
differences
(
different
currencies
),
8
there
are
none
.
Third
,
there
are
other
sub-disciplines
that
do
not
deserve
a
category
of
their
own
.
They
constitute
,
merely
,
implications
of
basic
economic
principles
.
Included
here
would
be
H
-
Public
Economics
I
-
Health
,
Education
,
and
Welfare
J
-
Labor
and
Demographic
Economics
K
-
Law
and
Economics
L
-
Industrial
Organization
M
-
Business
Administration
and
Business
Economics
;
Marketing
;
Accounting
O
-
Economic
Development
,
Technological
Change
,
and
Growth
Q
-
Agricultural
and
Natural
Resource
Economics
R
-
Urban
,
Rural
,
and
Regional
Economics
What
might
an
Austrian
breakdown
of
this
subject
matter
look
like
?
This
can
only
be
speculative
,
since
no
survey
of
economists
representative
of
this
tradition
has
ever
been
done
,
but
here
is
our
estimate
:
A
-
General
Economics
and
Teaching
B
-
Schools
of
Economic
Thought
and
Methodology
cago
Economics
.’
Another
argument
against
this
view
of
Friedman
:
the
widely
accepted
JEL
categorization
lists
“
B
-
Schools
of
Economic
Thought
and
Methodology
.”
8
But
not
trade
barriers
.
There
are
numerous
intra-national
trade
barriers
:
licenses
,
geographical
limitations
in
countries
such
as
Canada
,
etc
.
__________________________________________________________________
Laissez-Faire
6
/index.php?action=ajax&rs=GDMgetPage&rsargs[]=laissezfaire28_2.pdf&rsargs[]=3
__________________________________________________________________
C
-
Mathematical
and
Quantitative
Methods
D
-
Microeconomics
-
Macroeconomics
and
Monetary
Economics
-
International
Economics
-
Financial
Economics
-
Public
Economics
-
Health
,
Education
,
and
Welfare
-
Labor
and
Demographic
Economics
-
Law
and
Economics
-
Industrial
Organization
-
Business
Administration
and
Business
Economics
;
Marketing
;
Accounting
E
-
Economic
History
F
-
Economic
Systems
It
should
be
emphasized
that
we
are
not
claiming
that
Austrians
would
object
to
the
JEL
classification
per
se
.
Economics
must
be
broken
down
in
some
way
for
librarian
purposes
,
and
that
seems
as
good
way
as
any
.
The
objection
to
this
way
of
categorizing
things
lies
in
that
academic
disciplines
in
universities
are
broken
down
roughly
in
accord
with
this
categorization
,
and
this
isolates
the
fields
far
too
much
.
Of
course
,
even
for
purposes
of
presenting
material
to
students
economic
science
must
be
broken
down
in
some
way
.
Not
every
course
should
be
called
plain
old
“
economics
.”
Specialization
and
division
of
labor
must
be
served
here
as
elsewhere
.
Thus
we
offer
the
six
way
categorization
,
A
to
F
,
that
appears
above
.
2
.
Schools
of
thought
.
Here
are
the
schools
of
thought
that
together
might
be
considered
to
comprise
economics
:
Austrian
;
Behaviorist
;
Cambridge
,
England
;
Cambridge
,
Massachusetts
;
Chicagoan
;
Classical
;
9
George-ists
;
German
Historical
School
;
Experimental
;
Feminist
;
Fiscalist
;
10
Game
theory
;
Institutionalists
;
Keynesian
;
Lausanne
;
Manchester
;
Marxist
(
socialist
);
Mercantilist
;
Monetarist
;
Neo-Austrian
;
New
Keynesians
;
Neo-Keynesian
;
Physiocrats
;
Post
Keynesian
;
Pragmatists
;
Public
Choice
;
Rational
Expectations
,
Salamanca
;
Supply
Side
;
Utilitarians
;
Walrasians
.
11
Note
,
these
are
listed
in
alphabetical
order
.
On
what
basis
,
apart
from
the
present
alphabetical
organization
,
can
these
be
organized
?
Several
possibilities
spring
to
mind
.
One
is
political
ideology
:
adherence
to
,
or
opposition
against
,
laissez-faire
capitalism
and
private
property
rights
.
Let
us
offer
three
choices
:
pro
,
neutral
,
con
.
Here
is
how
we
would
place
each
of
these
schools
of
thought
into
these
three
options
:
Pro
:
Austrian
;
Chicagoan
;
Classical
;
Georgeists
;
Lausanne
;
Manchester
;
Monetarist
;
Neo-Austrian
;
Physiocrats
;
Public
Choice
;
It
is
an
interesting
question
as
to
how
a
purely
Austrian
graduate
school
would
organize
its
courses
.
One
reason
for
adhering
to
traditional
breakdowns
would
be
to
render
its
graduates
more
acceptable
on
the
job
market
.
But
suppose
for
some
reason
this
was
not
a
consideration
.
Thus
,
our
suggestion
.
9
Adam
Smith
,
Adam
Ferguson
,
David
Hume
,
John
Stuart
Mill
,
Marshall
.
10
We
are
nothing
if
not
inclusive
.
11
For
different
but
overlapping
schemas
,
see
http
://
cepa
.
newschool
.
edu
/
het
/
thought
.
htm
;
http
://
dmoz
.
org
/
Science
/
Social_Sciences
/
Eco
nomics
/
Schools_of_Thought
/
__________________________________________________________________
Laissez-Faire
7
|
|