批判实在论和制度经济学：整合Commons和North的科学方法

SoochowJournalofEconomicsandBusinessNo.51(December2005)：297-318.CriticalRealismandInstitutionalism:IntegratingtheScientificMethodofJohnR.CommonsandDouglassC.NorthCheng-PingCheng*(Received:February23,2004;FirstRevised:June18,2004;SecondRevised:January11,2005;Accepted:March31,2005)ABSTRACTThepaperexploreswhethercriticalrealism,arecentmeta-theory,isaneffectivewayinintegratingthescientificmethodofCommonsandNorth.Criticalrealismobjectstoorthodoxpositivism,stressestheimportanceofsocioeconomicontologyandadvocatestheapproachofretroduction.ThispaperfindsthatcriticalrealismisnotonlyconsistentwiththeinstitutionalismofCommonsandNorthbutalsocontributestotheintegrationoftheirscientificmethods.Moreover,criticalrealismishelpfultoeliminatetraditionalsourcesofconfusionininstitutionalismandoffersatheoreticalfoundationofemployingorthodoxscientifictoolsandtheoriesforin-stitutionalism.BasedonthecommonaltiesinmethodologyofCommonsandNorth,itispossibletodevelopanewscientificperspectivebyvirtueofcriticalrealism.Keywords:Institutionalism,Criticalrealism,Methodology,Commons,North*AssistantProfessor,DepartmentofEconomics,SoochowUniversity.ThispaperwasfinancedbyNationalScienceCouncilofTaiwan(NSC89-2415-H-031-004)andpresentedintheAnnualMeetingofHistoryofEconomicSociety,Vancouver2000.第五十一期1.INTRODUCTIONTheresurgenceofinstitutionaleconomics1hasraisedanumberofimportantissuesre-gardingthecommensurabilitybetweentheoriginalinstitutionaleconomics(OIE)2andthenewinstitutionaleconomics(NIE).3Someresearchers(Rutherford,1994and1995;Groen-ewegen,Kerstholt,andNagelkerke,1995;Cheng,1998and2002)findsignificantcommon-altybetweenthetheoriesofJohnR.Commons4,aleadingfigureofOIE,andDouglassC.North5,theforerunnerofNIE,ingeneral,andbetweentheirscientificmethod,inparticular.Aninterestingissueiswhethertheirscientificmethodscanbeintegratedandinwhichwayifitispossible.Commons'sscientificmethodhasaholisticcharacteristic,whereasNorth'sscientifictheorycarriesacollectiveattributeinhislateperiodalthoughitispartlygraftedontoneoc-lassicisminhisearlystage(Cheng,1998).Apparently,orthodoxpositivism,basedonmeth-odologicalindividualism,notonlydoesnotofferafoundationforcommunicationbetweenthetwo,butalsoindeedcontradictstothecommoncollectiveelementsintwoinstitutiona-lists.Criticalrealism,whicharoseinthelate1980s,providesanewperspectiveoneconomicmethod.Itstressestheimportanceofsocioeconomicontologyandadvocatestheapproachofretroductionorabduction.Criticalrealismespeciallyobjectstoorthodoxpositivism,orHumeanempiricism,6whichtendstoneglectontologyandadvocatedeductivemodelingre-sultedfrommisconceivedepistemologicalreductionism.Criticalrealismisagainstthescientificviewofpositivism,whichviewsscienceasseekingtheregularitiesofevents,andassertsthateconomicscienceshouldcenteronidentifyingandilluminatingthedeepstruc-tureofreality,suchaspower,tendencies,mechanisms,andtrends.IscriticalrealismaneffectivewayinintegratingthescientificmethodsofCommonsandNorth?Thisstudyexploresthatquestioninseveralsteps.First,Iwilldiscussthefeatu-resofcriticalrealism.Second,IwillapplyittotheworkofCommonsandthentothatofNorth.Third,Iwillexplainhowaneffectiveintegrationoftheirscientificmethodsisposs-iblethroughcriticalrealism.Thefinalsectionisabriefconclusion.批判實在論和制度經濟學：整合Commons和North的科學方法2.THEFEATURESOFCRITICALREALISMCriticalrealism,whichoriginatedinthephilosophyofscienceofRoyBhaskarandwasdevelopedfurtherineconomicsbyTonyLawson(1994,1997and1999)7,isoneofsignifi-cantrecentdevelopmentsineconomicmethodology(Backhouse,1994;Davis,Hands,andMaki1998,pp.404-9).Ithasbeenbothcriticalimplicationsaboutthepovertyofmainstreameconomicsanddevelopmentallyconstructiveinelaboratinganalternativeperspective.Itsrealisticfeatureistoopposedoctrinessuchasidealism,empiricism,conventionalism,in-strumentalism,relativismandconstructivism.Itclaimsthateconomicsshouldavoidtheuseofconceptswithoutrealreferences,butshouldbeconstructedastruth-functionals.Itiscom-mittedtoelaboratethenatureofsocialbeingand/orhowweaccesssocialreality(Lawson,T.,1999;Foss,1994)Criticalrealismprincipallystressessocioeconomicontology,whereasmainstreameconomicstendstoneglectontologyandemphasizeepistemology,whichT.Lawsonclaimsistheconsequenceofepistemicfallacy.Thisfallacyleadsthatmattersofontologycanal-waysbere-phrasedinepistemologicaltermsandviewthatstatementsaboutbeingcanal-waysbereducedtostatementsaboutknowledge(Fleetwood1999,p.129).Theperseveranceofmainstreamdeductivemodelingistheresultofthatmattersofamisconceivedepistem-ologicalreductionism.8ForLawson,socioeconomicrealityincludesnotonlyeventsandexperiencesbutalsostructuresandmechanismswhichareneglectedinmostorthodoxeconomictheories.Real-ityincludesthreelevels:(1)theempirical—experiencesandperceptions;(2)theactual—events;(3)andthedeep—entitiesandmechanisms(Foss,1994;Lawson,T.1997).Thesethreedomainsareseparate,andmovesbetweenthemarecontingentoperations.Economicknowledgestartsfrom“theempirical”perceivedbytheoristfrom“theactual,”andthenistheorizedintermsof“thedeep”underlying“theactual.”Thisviewoftheoryimpliesthatempiricalre