Value Judgments and Value Neutrality in Economics
Philippe Mongin
Abstract
Philippe Mongin
Abstract
The paper analyses economic evaluations by distinguishing evaluative statements from actual value judgments. From this basis, it compares four solutions to the value neutrality problem in economics. After rebutting the strong theses about neutrality (normative economics is illegitimate) and non‐neutrality (the social sciences are value‐impregnated), the paper settles the case between the weak neutrality thesis (common in welfare economics) and a novel, weak non‐neutrality thesis that extends the realm of normative economics more widely than the other weak thesis does.
OpenAlex reports 101 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
The paper analyses economic evaluations by distinguishing evaluative statements from actual value judgments. From this basis, it compares four solutions to the value neutrality problem in economics. After rebutting the strong theses about neutrality (normative economics is illegitimate) and non‐neutrality (the social sciences are value‐impregnated), the paper settles the case between the weak neutrality thesis (common in welfare economics) and a novel, weak non‐neutrality thesis that extends the realm of normative economics more widely than the other weak thesis does.
Key concepts: Neutrality, Normative, Positive economics, Economics, Value (mathematics), Realm, Public economics, Microeconomics