| Issue: | 2019 №2 (66) |
| Section: | Economic theory |
| UDK: | 330.4 : 008.2 |
| DOI: | https://doi.org/10.33271/ev/66.009 |
| Article language: | Ukrainian |
| Pages: | 9-17 |
| Title: | Theoretical-methodological pluralism and totalitarian legacy in economic research |
| Author: | Huzenko I. Yu., Dnipro University of Technology |
| Annotation: | The article deals with theoretical and methodological edifice of economic science from the perspective of the processes of post totalitarian transformation and impact of totalitarian remnants upon mentioned edifice. Theoretical and methodological monism is treated to be a manifestation of totalitarianism in social sciences. While theoretical and methodological pluralism is proved to be the main opponent of totalitarianism in the field of these sciences and the main tool of totalitarian remnants eradication in the same field. There is a direct correlation between the complexity and diversity of the «subject» and the complexity and diversity of the «method»: pluralism of the subject sphere implies the same pluralism of the theoretical and methodological realm. So study of economy is necessarily pluralistic both in its subject sphere and in its theoretical and methodological basis. First of all, this pluralism is evident in case of study of transformational and globalization processes. Among the manifestations of this pluralism of economic studies interdisciplinarity can be found. The pluralistic nature not only of theoretical and methodological sphere of economic science but also of the whole social sciences is defined. The definitions of «methodology» and the interpretations of «methodological pluralism» are considered in a comparative way and from the perspective of the cognitive needs of economic science in the field of post totalitarian research. The unproductive and distortive nature of monistic methodological schemes as well as their affiliation with totalitarian practices are emphasized. Any theory, including economic one, has not an exclusive right to truth. Scientific creativity is incompatible with any monopoly while scientific truth by itself is a quite relative construct. That’s why science, particularly social one, by its structure and functioning, is much closer to market and democracy, contradicting to totalitarianism. First of all, it is illustrated by competition and combination of theories under the conditions of theoretical and methodological pluralism. The pluralistic nature not only of the whole theoretical and methodological edifice of economic science, but also of some of its methods was demonstrated by the example of the systems method. Four main forms of pluralism are defined. |
| Keywords: | Economic science, Subject and method, Theoretical and methodological pluralism, Totalitarianism, Post totalitarian transformation, Economic research |
| File of the article: | EV20192_009-017.pdf |
| Literature: | - 1. Kononenko, S. (2012). Formy politolohichnoho rozuminnya misznarodnih vidnosyn. Kyiv: NAN Ukrainy, In-t vsesvitnoi istorii.
- 2. Feyerabend, P. (1986). Izbrannyye trudyy po metodologii nauki. Moskva: Progress.
- 3. Lakatos, I. (1995). Falsifikatsiya i metodologiya nauchno-issledovatelskikh programm. Moskva: Medium.
- 4. Popper, K. (2002). Obyektivnoye znaniye. Evolyutsionnyyy podkhod. Moskva: Editorial URSS.
- 5. Leontyev, V. (1990) Ekonomicheskiye esse. Teoriya, issledovaniya, fakty i politika. Moskva: Politizdat.
- 6. Rodrik, D. (2016). Ekonomika reshayet: sila i slabost «mrachnoy nauki». Moskva: Izd. -vo Instituta Gaydara.
- 7. Halchinskyy, A. (2010). Ekonomichna metodologiia. Logika onovlennia: Kurs Lektsiy. Kyiv: ADEF-Ukraina.
- 8. Vlasyuk, O. S., & Kononenko, S. V. (2017). Kremlivska ahresiya protiv Ukrainy : rozdumy v kontexti viyny. Kyiv : NISD.
|
Archive