Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-13T00:59:15.330Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Case Study in Realism: Why Econometrics is Committed to Capacities

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 February 2022

Nancy Cartwright
Nancy Cartwright*
Affiliation:
Stanford University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Part VI. Realism
Information
PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association , Volume 1988 , Issue 2: Volume Two: Symposia and Invited Papers 1988 , 1988 , pp. 190 - 197
Copyright
Copyright © 1989 by the Philosophy of Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Cartwright, N. (1989), Nature's Capacities and their Measurement. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Engle, R., Hendry, D. and Richard, J. (1983), “Exogeneity”, Econometrica 51: 277–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frisch, R. (1948), “Statistical versus Theoretical Relations in Economic Macrodynamics”, in Autonomy of Economic Relations, Frisch, R., Haavelmo, T., Koopmans, T.C. and Tinberger, J. (eds.), a collection of photocopied articles issued by the University of Oslo.Google Scholar
Haavelmo, T. (1944), The Probability in Econometrics, supplement to Econometrica 12.Google Scholar
Hendry, D. (1979), “Econometrics — Alchemy or Science?” An Inaugural Lecture, London School of Economics, November 1979 (Typescript).Google Scholar
Leamer, E. (1983), “Let's Take the Con Out of Econometrics”, American Economic Review 73: 31–64.Google Scholar