Where Has Philosophical Economics Gone?

According to Heilbroner, the aim of economics is to "help us better understand the capitalist context that is most likely to shape our collective fate towards the near future." In the era of classical economists, there is still much understanding and learning about the economy. As the field of economics becomes more complex, secular philosophers become more and more difficult to express as economic fields become more sophisticated. Through this process, the economic sector is subdivided into many areas including microeconomics and macroeconomics, and development, finance, and welfare economics.

Almost all economic theories think that people act reasonably. Then rationality and reason are built into almost every economic thought. As philosophers doubt speak to you a lot about rational thought. There is no reason why it can not act reasonably, so it is meaningful to study deeply in order to understand economics. Everyone knows the idea of ​​supply and demand. One problem that most people think is that as the price goes down (other conditions remain the same), the necessary amount increases. Whether this is a real causal reaction or not, for example, when the price goes down, is it really a fashionable one?

The answer to the question "What is economics" seems to be the subject of a strict philosophical debate. That's it, but it is also very practical. In order to ask questions we ask for answers to every science like economics. We need to know what economics is like to be able to use it to answer our view on the world. You can learn from practical science. Physics is research of physical systems, chemical research of chemical systems, biological research of biological systems, research of computer science computing systems, psychological research of psychological systems, and research of sociology systems. Theological science (yes, that is, Cardinal Newman proves the practicality of that knowledge) is even a study of the system of God. All practical science is an academic field, its systematic knowledge

The economic subfield of the comparative economic system was built as an academic mirror of the contours of the Cold War. Therefore, early studies of the comparative economic system ignored the social science and philosophical literature on communism and socialism, and supported the confusion of these terms with specific features of the so-called Soviet spheres (generalization of reading excess). As you can see from the history, the creation of the Chinese Revolution in 1949 and a constantly changing "Chinese model" proved to be a real pain of the rule of Stalinism against the theoretical building of the Soviet Union. Chinese leaders are trying to explain Marx to themselves. It often means dismissing the Marxist interpretation of Stalinism (Orthodox Marxism - Leninism), creating unique alternative epistemology and ontology. These theoretical differences lead to different strategies