Istanbul Journal of Economics

SUBMITINFORMATION
EnglishTürkçe

Review


DOI :10.26650/ISTJECON2021-932202   IUP :10.26650/ISTJECON2021-932202    Full Text (PDF)

Economics: From Modernism to Postmodernism

Hasan Bakır, Görkem Bahtiyar

The dominant form of theory in the world of economics today, namely, the Neoclassical economics, claims its theories are universal, scientific and rational. Relying on the positivist methodology, the claim that humanity will be able to dominate the environment through positive analysis, which is one of the tenets of the enlightenment and hence modernism has an important place in the development of this perspective in economics. However, the idea that the social environment of man could easily be manipulated with positive inferences like those in the natural sciences seems problematic. The debate over whether it is possible to mention of single positive facts in economic life started long ago and more pluralistic points of view flourished later. Within this process, diversity and difference replaces the single fact positivism, and methodological individualism is replaced by a more holistic approach. At the same time individuals’ thoughts and emotions as well as cultural norms of different societies are subjects of scrutiny again. In this vein, the Original Institutional Economics and the Heuristic approach to economics and mentality came into the fore again. The aim of this study is to present the evolution of economics from modernism to postmodernism as a disciplined thought process.

Keywords: Modernism, Postmodernism, Economic thought, Positivism, Methodology
JEL Classification : B10 , B13 , N01
DOI :10.26650/ISTJECON2021-932202   IUP :10.26650/ISTJECON2021-932202    Full Text (PDF)

Modernizmden Postmodernizme İktisat

Hasan Bakır, Görkem Bahtiyar

Neoklasik iktisat, günümüzün hâkim iktisat anlayışıdır. Pozitivist bir metodoloji üzerine temellenen Neoklasik iktisat, ortaya attığı teorilerin bilimsel, evrensel ve rasyonel olduğunu iddia etmektedir. Aydınlanma düşüncesinin temelinde yer alan, olgucu analiz ile insanın çevresine hâkim olacağı iddiası ve dolayısıyla modernizm, bu bakış açısının gelişmesinde önemli bir yere sahiptir. Ancak, modernizmin kişilerden bağımsız ve gözlemlenebilir olgularla açıklanan gerçek dünya görüşünü ifade eden pozitivist yönteme dayanan bu hâkim iktisat anlayışı, karşı argümanlarını da beraberinde getirmiştir. İnsanın sosyal çevresinin de doğal çevre gibi pozitif çıkarımlar ile kolaylıkla şekillendirilmesi düşüncesi sorunlu görülmektedir. İktisatta tek bir doğrudan söz edilemeyeceği tartışması başlatılmış ve farklı yaklaşımları da içeren çoğulcu bir bakış açısı daha sonra gündeme gelmiştir. Bu süreçle birlikte tek doğrunun yerini çeşitleme ve farklılık, temsili bireyin yerini holistik yaklaşım almakta, bireylerin duygu, düşünce dünyaları ve kültürel bağlam tekrar analiz konusu edilmektedir. Postmodernist bir ton taşıyan bu itirazın da dikkate alınması, iktisadın kendisine ilişkin kavrayışımızı kuvvetlendirmesi açısından önemlidir. Bu süreçte, holistik yaklaşımı savunan Orijinal Kurumsal İktisadın özellikle evrim vurgusuyla birlikte ön plana çıkması söz konusudur. Kurumsalcılığın yanında, yine ahlak-zihniyet-iktisat ilişkisini inceleyen Yorumsamacı yaklaşımın da tekrar ele alınması gerekmektedir. Bu çalışmanın amacı da modernizmden postmodernizme bir süreç olarak iktisadın serüvenini ortaya koymaktır.

Keywords: Modernizm, Postmodernizm, İktisadi düşünce, Olguculuk, Metodoloji
JEL Classification : B10 , B13 , N01

EXTENDED ABSTRACT


From Classical Economic Thought of the 18th century to today’s New Consensus, the science of economics has come a long way. There are various colors in the pallet of the discipline and they all represent different methodological frameworks. At this point in time, Neoclassical economics, which is the dominant form of theory building in the world of economics today bases its arguments on a positivist methodology, claiming its theories are universal, scientific and rational. However, the struggle for mathematical modelling which is one of the most profound features of the Neoclassical view, came with sacrifices. For instance, one can observe that in its pursuit of formalization, economics reduces relations in a society to mere man-object level, thus, mostly excluding the social side of economic transactions. An economic argumentation must encompass the relation of man to man, and man with the society. It is evident that under this quest for formalization lies the methodological understanding which has its roots in modernist thinking. That is the claim that humanity will be able to dominate its environment through positive analysis, which is one of the tenets of the enlightenment and hence modernism has an important place in the development of this perspective in economics. However, with this economic mentality, came some counter arguments, too. Because of the devastating wars, economic crises, poverty, inequality, famines etc. the reign of this modernist thinking was challenged from a number of points of view. It was seen that modernism was not the answer to the problems that are faced by humanity. Furthermore, it brought with it a new set of problems, some of them are still waiting to be solved. For once, the idea that the social environment of man could easily be manipulated From Classical Economic Thought of the 18th century to today’s New Consensus, the science of economics has come a long way. There are various colors in the pallet of the discipline and they all represent different methodological frameworks. At this point in time, Neoclassical economics, which is the dominant form of theory building in the world of economics today bases its arguments on a positivist methodology, claiming its theories are universal, scientific and rational. However, the struggle for mathematical modelling which is one of the most profound features of the Neoclassical view, came with sacrifices. For instance, one can observe that in its pursuit of formalization, economics reduces relations in a society to mere man-object level, thus, mostly excluding the social side of economic transactions. An economic argumentation must encompass the relation of man to man, and man with the society. It is evident that under this quest for formalization lies the methodological understanding which has its roots in modernist thinking. That is the claim that humanity will be able to dominate its environment through positive analysis, which is one of the tenets of the enlightenment and hence modernism has an important place in the development of this perspective in economics. However, with this economic mentality, came some counter arguments, too. Because of the devastating wars, economic crises, poverty, inequality, famines etc. the reign of this modernist thinking was challenged from a number of points of view. It was seen that modernism was not the answer to the problems that are faced by humanity. Furthermore, it brought with it a new set of problems, some of them are still waiting to be solved. For once, the idea that the social environment of man could easily be manipulated.


PDF View

References

  • Acar, G. T. (2008). İktisadı değiştirmek: Neoklasik iktisada eleştirel bir yaklaşım. İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları. google scholar
  • Arslan, M. (2015). İktisatta yeni yaklaşımlar, heterodoks iktisat ve yapıçözüm: Karmaşıklığın bilimi ve postmodern bilim söylemi bağlamında bir değerlendirme. E. Eren & M. Sarfati (Eds.), İktisatta Yeni Yaklaşımlar kitabı içinde (s.47-57). İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları. google scholar
  • Bauman, Z. (2003). Yasa koyucular ile yorumcular. (Kemal Atakay, Çev.). İstanbul: Metis Yayınları. google scholar
  • Beed, C. (1991). Philosophy of science and contemporary economics: An overview. Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, 13(4), 459 - 494. google scholar
  • Bell, D. & Kristol, I. (2003) Models and reality in economic discourse in the crisis in economic theory (Ed.). New York: Free Press. google scholar
  • Bilir, H. (2019). Postmodernizmin iktisada yansımaları. Felsefe ve Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 27, 221-241. google scholar
  • Cassirer, E. (1979). The philosophy of the enlightenment. (Fritz C.A. Koelin & J. P. Pettegrove, Trans.). Princeton: Princeton University Press. google scholar
  • Cevizci, A. (2017). Aristoteles hayatı ve eserleri. (Furkan Akderin, Çev.). Nikomakhos’a Etik kitabının içinde. İstanbul: Say Yayınları. google scholar
  • Çiğdem, A. (2004). Bir imkan olarak modernite, weber ve habermas. İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları. google scholar
  • Çiğdem, A. (2009). Aydınlanma düşüncesi. İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları. google scholar
  • Demir, Ö. (1996). İktisatta yöntem tartışmaları. Ankara: Vadi Yayınları google scholar
  • Demir, Ö. (2009). Bilim felsefesi. Ankara: Vadi Yayınları. google scholar
  • Demir, Ö. (2019). İktisat metodolojisi. Bursa: Sentez Yayınları. google scholar
  • Dow, C. S. (1991). Are there any signs of postmodernism with economics ? Methdos, 3(1) ( June), 81-5. google scholar
  • Dulupçu, A. M. (1998). Modernizm - iktisat - retorik ve metafor üzerine post - epistemolojik bir deneme. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 3, 15-34. google scholar
  • Eagleton, T. (2011). Postmodernizmin yanılsamaları. (Mehmet Küçük, Çev.). İstanbul: Ayrıntı Yayınları. google scholar
  • Eck, A. (2017). Physicists confirm that we’re not living ın a computer simulation. https://www.pbs.org/ wgbh/nova/article/physicists-confirm-that-were-not-living-in-a-computer-simulation/ (Erişim tarihi: 05.07.2019). google scholar
  • Eren, E. (2011). Yeni iktisatta ortak noktalar. İçinde E. Eren & M. Sarfati (Eds.), iktisatta yeni yaklaşımlar (ss.13-45). İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları. google scholar
  • Esgün, T. G. (2006). Postmodernizme rağmen aydınlanma. Kaygı. Uludağ Üniversitesi Fen-Edebiyat Fakültesi Felsefe Dergisi, 0(6), 96-103. google scholar
  • Featherstone, M. (2005). Postmodernizm ve tüketim kültürü. (M. Küçük, Çev.). İstanbul: Ayrıntı Yayınları. google scholar
  • Feyerabend, P. K. (1994). Against method. London: Verso. google scholar
  • Feyerabend, P. K. (2017). Özgür bir toplumda bilim. (A. Kardam, Çev.). İstanbul: Ayrıntı Yayınları. google scholar
  • Friedman, M. (2008). The methodology of positive economics. In D. M. Hausman (Ed.), The Philosophy of Economics: An Anthology (s. 145-178). Cambridge University Press. google scholar
  • Galeon, D. (2017). Sorry, Elon. Physicists say we definitely aren’t living in a computer simulation. https://futurism.com/sorry-elon-physicists-say-we-definitely-arent-living-in-a-computer-simulation, (Erişim tarihi: 05.07.2019). google scholar
  • Goody, J. (2008). Kapitalizm ve mdernlik. (İ. Durdu, Çev.). İstanbul: Küre Yayınları. google scholar
  • Görün, F. (1979). İktisatta kapsam ve yöntem. Ankara: Orta Doğu Teknik Üniversitesi Yayınları. google scholar
  • Habermas, J. (1996). Modernity: An unfinished project. In M. Passerin d’Entreves & Seyla Benhabib (Eds.), Habermas and the unfinished projet of modernity (pp. 38-58). Polity Press. google scholar
  • Hale, E. E. (2001). Lecture notes from economics 327: Comparative economic systems. In W. J. Samuels (Ed.), Edward Everett Hale: The Writings of an Economic Maverick - Research in the History of Economic Thought and Methodology (pp. 105-138). Emerald Group Publishing Limited: Bingley. google scholar
  • Harvey, D. (2010). Postmodernliğin durumu. (Sungur Savran, Çev.). İstanbul: Metis Yayınları. google scholar
  • Hausman, D. & McPherson, M. (1994). Economics, rationality and ethics. In D. M. Hausman (Ed.) The philosophy of economics: an anthology (pp. 252 - 274). Cambridge University Press. google scholar
  • İlkorur, K. (2009, 24 Aralık). İktisat tartışmaları ... (2), Radikal gazetesi. http://www.radikal.com.tr/ yazarlar/korkmaz-ilkorur/iktisat-tartismalari-2-970846/ (Erişim tarihi: 4.03.2021). google scholar
  • Jevons, S. W. (1888). The theory of political economy. London: Macmillan. google scholar
  • Kara, A. (1996). Neoklasik iktisatta pozitivist metodoloji: Eleştirel bir yaklaşım. Ö. Demir (Ed.). İktisatta Yöntem Tartışmalar içinde (s. 105-131). Ankara: Vadi Yayınları. google scholar
  • Kara, A. (2001). İktisat kuramında pozitivizm ve post modernizm. Ankara: Vadi Yayınları. google scholar
  • Keyder, Ç. (1979). İktisatta kapsam ve yöntem. içinde fikret görün (Ed.) İktisatta kapsam ve yöntem: Seçme yazılar. Ankara: Orta Doğu Teknik Üniversitesi Yayınları. google scholar
  • Kılınçoğlu, D. T. (2018). İbn Haldun: Sistem kuran düşünür. İçinde A.A. Eren ve E. Kırmızıaltın (Ed.). İktisat sosyolojisi (ss. 41-82). Ankara: Heretik Yayınları. google scholar
  • Lyotard, J. F. (2000). Postmodern Durum: Bilgi Üzerine Bir Rapor. Çev. Ahmet Çiğdem. Ankara: Vadi Yayınları. google scholar
  • Mankiw, G. (2014, March 23rd). When the scientist is also a philosopher. The New York Times.https:// www.hks.harvard.edu/centers/mrcbg/programs/growthpolicy/when-scientist-also-philosopher. (Erişim Tarihi:18.06.2021). google scholar
  • Marshall, A. (1920). Principals of economics. London: MacMillan. google scholar
  • Nietzsche, F. (2015). Böyle söyledi zerdüşt. (Mustafa Tüzel, Çev.). İstanbul: İş Bankası Yayınları. google scholar
  • Niggle, C. (2006). Evolutionary keynesianism: A synthesis of ınstitutionalist and post-keynesian macroeconomics. Journal of Economic Issues, 40 (2), 405-412. google scholar
  • Nijkamp, P. & Poot, J. (2005). The last word on the wage curve. Journal of Economic Surveys, 19 (3), 421-450. google scholar
  • Friedman, M. (2000). Pozitif iktisadın metodolojisi (Çev. Mehmet Orhan). İçinde Ö. Demir (Ed.). Devlet, rekabet, mülkiyet ve iktisat (11-60). Adapazarı: Değişim Yayınları. google scholar
  • Özatay, F. (2009). İktisat kuramı deprem geçiriyor. Radikal gazetesi. http://www.radikal.com.tr/ yazarlar/fatih-ozatay/iktisat-kurami-deprem-geciriyor-970305/ (Erişim tarihi: 5.03.2021). google scholar
  • Özel, H. (2006). İktisat, ideoloji ve iktidar [Konuşma metni]. Bilim ve İktidar başlıklı konferansta yapılan konuşma, Hacettepe Üniversitesi, Ankara. Erişim adresi: http://yunus.hacettepe.edu. tr/~ozel/Bilim_iktidar_Karaburun.pdf (Erişim tarihi: 5.03.2021). google scholar
  • Peters, O. & Adamou, A. (2018). Ergodicity economics [Blog yazısı]. Erişim adresi: https:// ergodicityeconomics.files.wordpress.com/2018/06/ergodicity_economics.pdf (Erişim tarihi: 5. 03. 2021) google scholar
  • Peterson, W.C. (1977). Institutionalism, Keynes and the real world. Journal of Economic Issues, 11:2, 201-221. google scholar
  • Reinert, E.S. (2012). Neo-classical economics: Atrail of economic destruction since the 1970s, Real-World Economics Review, 60, 2-17. google scholar
  • Rosenberg, A. (2020). Bilim felsefesi: Çağdaş bir giriş. Ankara: Dipnot Yayınları. google scholar
  • Ruccio, D.F. (1991). Postmodernism and economics. Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, 13(4), 495510. google scholar
  • Sarfati, M. (2006). Rasyonalite ve neoklasik kuram. Ekonomik Yaklaşım, 16(57), 103-130. google scholar
  • Sarıbay, A. Y. (2004). Modernitenin ironisi olarak globalleşme, İstanbul: Everest Yayınları. google scholar
  • Schulte-Sasse, J. (1986). Introduction: Modernity and modernism, postmodernity and postmodernism: Framing the Issue. Cultural Critique, 5, 5 - 22. google scholar
  • Screpanti, E. (2000). The postmodern crisis in economics and the revolution against modernism. Rethinking Marxism, 12(1), 87-111. google scholar
  • Serdaroğlu, U. (2010). Feminist iktisatın bakışı postmodernist mi? Ankara: Efil Yayınevi. google scholar
  • Simon, H. (1986). Rationality in Psychology and Economics. The Journal of Business, 59(4),S209-S224. google scholar
  • Skidelsky, R. (2009, 15 Aralık). Economic Theory: How to rebuild a newly shamed subject. Financial Times. https://www.ft.com/content/098e5930-e843-11de-8a02-00144feab49a (Erişim tarihi: 5.03.2020) google scholar
  • Slovic, P.& Sarah, L. (1983), Preference reversals: A broader perspective. The American Economic Review, 73(4), 596 - 605. google scholar
  • Smith, A. (2006). Milletlerin zenginliği. (H. Derin, Çev.). İstanbul: Türkiye İş Bankası Yayınları. google scholar
  • Smith A. (2018). Ahlaki duygular kuramı. (D. Kızılay, Çev.). İstanbul: Pinhan Yayınları. google scholar
  • Snow, A. J. (1924). Psychology in economic theory. The Journal of Political Economy, 32(4), 487 - 496. google scholar
  • Tauheed, L. F. (2011). A proposed methodological synthesis of Post-Keynesian and Institutionalist Economics. Journal of Economic Issues, 45(4), 819-838. google scholar
  • Tweeten, L. & Zulauf, C. (1999). The challenge of postmodernism to applied economics. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 81(5), 1166 - 1172. google scholar
  • Wagner, P. (2015). Interpretations of modernity and the problem of World - making. Papers: Revista de Sociologia, 100(3), 267-279. google scholar
  • Walras, L. (1965). Elements of pure economics. (W. Jaffe, Çev.), London: George Allen and Unwin LTS. google scholar
  • Wilber, C.K. (2003). Ethics and economic actors. Post - Autistic Economics Review, 21(3). google scholar
  • Yılmaz, F. (2009). Rasyonalite iktisat özelinde bir tartışma. İstanbul: Paradigma Yayınları. google scholar

Citations

Copy and paste a formatted citation or use one of the options to export in your chosen format


EXPORT



APA

Bakır, H., & Bahtiyar, G. (2021). Economics: From Modernism to Postmodernism. Istanbul Journal of Economics, 71(2), 341-366. https://doi.org/10.26650/ISTJECON2021-932202


AMA

Bakır H, Bahtiyar G. Economics: From Modernism to Postmodernism. Istanbul Journal of Economics. 2021;71(2):341-366. https://doi.org/10.26650/ISTJECON2021-932202


ABNT

Bakır, H.; Bahtiyar, G. Economics: From Modernism to Postmodernism. Istanbul Journal of Economics, [Publisher Location], v. 71, n. 2, p. 341-366, 2021.


Chicago: Author-Date Style

Bakır, Hasan, and Görkem Bahtiyar. 2021. “Economics: From Modernism to Postmodernism.” Istanbul Journal of Economics 71, no. 2: 341-366. https://doi.org/10.26650/ISTJECON2021-932202


Chicago: Humanities Style

Bakır, Hasan, and Görkem Bahtiyar. “Economics: From Modernism to Postmodernism.” Istanbul Journal of Economics 71, no. 2 (Apr. 2024): 341-366. https://doi.org/10.26650/ISTJECON2021-932202


Harvard: Australian Style

Bakır, H & Bahtiyar, G 2021, 'Economics: From Modernism to Postmodernism', Istanbul Journal of Economics, vol. 71, no. 2, pp. 341-366, viewed 23 Apr. 2024, https://doi.org/10.26650/ISTJECON2021-932202


Harvard: Author-Date Style

Bakır, H. and Bahtiyar, G. (2021) ‘Economics: From Modernism to Postmodernism’, Istanbul Journal of Economics, 71(2), pp. 341-366. https://doi.org/10.26650/ISTJECON2021-932202 (23 Apr. 2024).


MLA

Bakır, Hasan, and Görkem Bahtiyar. “Economics: From Modernism to Postmodernism.” Istanbul Journal of Economics, vol. 71, no. 2, 2021, pp. 341-366. [Database Container], https://doi.org/10.26650/ISTJECON2021-932202


Vancouver

Bakır H, Bahtiyar G. Economics: From Modernism to Postmodernism. Istanbul Journal of Economics [Internet]. 23 Apr. 2024 [cited 23 Apr. 2024];71(2):341-366. Available from: https://doi.org/10.26650/ISTJECON2021-932202 doi: 10.26650/ISTJECON2021-932202


ISNAD

Bakır, Hasan - Bahtiyar, Görkem. “Economics: From Modernism to Postmodernism”. Istanbul Journal of Economics 71/2 (Apr. 2024): 341-366. https://doi.org/10.26650/ISTJECON2021-932202



TIMELINE


Submitted03.05.2021
Accepted22.11.2021
Published Online31.12.2021

LICENCE


Attribution-NonCommercial (CC BY-NC)

This license lets others remix, tweak, and build upon your work non-commercially, and although their new works must also acknowledge you and be non-commercial, they don’t have to license their derivative works on the same terms.


SHARE




Istanbul University Press aims to contribute to the dissemination of ever growing scientific knowledge through publication of high quality scientific journals and books in accordance with the international publishing standards and ethics. Istanbul University Press follows an open access, non-commercial, scholarly publishing.