The intersection of philosophy and economics is a vibrant area of research. Take a look at specialist journals such as Economics & Philosophy and the Journal of Economic Methodology. Or just attend one of the conferences or summer schools of the International Network of Economic Method (INEM).
But what should that kind of work be called? And how should we brand ourselves, those of us operating in this area? The answers are not obvious.
‘Economic methodology’ is the study of economic method – the scientific method in the context of economics. That’s too narrow. Many of the questions that appear in the intersection of philosophy and economics aren’t about methodology at all. They may be about semantics: the meaning of economic terms: “What does ‘welfare’ mean?” They may be about ontology: “Is money real?” They may be about other things as well.
‘Philosophy of economics’ is a fine term. It has both ‘philosophy’ and ‘economics’ in it. It emphasizes the continuity with philosophy of science – the branch of philosophy that examines philosophical problems emerging within the sciences. Many philosophers interested in economics (and economists interested in philosophy) do in fact occupy themselves with such problems. For example, a question such as ‘Can happiness be scientifically measured?’ is properly categorized as philosophy of economics, since it addresses a philosophical problem that emerges within economics – in this case, the economics of well-being.
Yet, the term 'philosophy of economics' when applied to all work in the intersection between philosophy and economics can be misleading. The term suggests that such work is largely derivative – as though philosophers care about topics in that intersection only because economists study them – when in reality philosophical reflection on things like rationality and well-being, wealth and inequality precede the emergence of economics as a scientific discipline by millennia. Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics, for example, was written around 350 BC and discusses many issues that are economic in nature – including, of course, the topic of well-being.
I propose instead that we use the term ‘philosophical economics’ to refer to work in the intersection between philosophy and economics.
In the French-speaking world, the term ‘philosophie économique’ is not uncommon. The equivalent English construction, ‘economic philosophy,’ is sometimes used, most famously by Joan Robinson. However, using ‘economic’ as a modifier suggests that we are talking about a particular kind of philosophy, like analytic or continental – when in reality topics in the intersection between philosophy and economics are open to philosophical inquiry of all kinds. (‘Economic’ might also sound a little crass.) And both ‘philosophy of economics’ and ‘economic philosophy’ suggest that the work in question falls wholly within philosophy – ignoring the fact that much interesting work in the intersection between philosophy and economics is done by economists and others who do not see themselves as advancing a purely philosophical agenda.
I propose instead that we use the term ‘philosophical economics’ to refer to work in the intersection between philosophy and economics, and that those of us who do this kind of work brand ourselves ‘philosophical economists.’ The analogous term 'philosophical psychology' is already in widespread use. There is, for example, a prominent journal by that name. ‘Philosophical economics’ strikes me as descriptively accurate and suitably inclusive. It suggests that we are talking about economic topics, but in a philosophical manner. It does not make the enterprise seem derivative. And it does not give the impression that the work in question falls wholly within the discipline of philosophy.
I am not the first to use the term. And I am not saying that we should stop using ‘philosophy of economics,’ etc. when they apply. But ‘philosophical economics’ is a good one. Let's use it.
All sounds right. Does the 'ethics of economics' fall under philosophical economics too? I'm thinking that part of it would, insofar as we assume that one needs to inquire into various ethical questions and economic / institutional questions together. Part of it might not, namely the part concerning the relations between the more strictly ethical claims made in the ethics of economics and ethical claims made in other domains.