https://www.ejpe.org/journal/issue/feedErasmus Journal for Philosophy and Economics2023-01-31T16:33:24+01:00Måns Abrahamsoneditors@ejpe.orgOpen Journal Systems<p>The Erasmus Journal for Philosophy and Economics (EJPE) is a peer-reviewed bi-annual academic journal located at <a href="https://www.eur.nl/">Erasmus University Rotterdam</a>. EJPE publishes research on the methodology, history, ethics, and interdisciplinary relations of economics.</p>https://www.ejpe.org/journal/article/view/668Review of Claudia Goldin's Career and Family: Women’s Century-Long Journey toward Equity. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2021, xii + 344 pp.2022-04-26T04:15:10+02:00Sarah F. Smallsarah.small@utah.edu2022-11-03T00:00:00+01:00Copyright (c) 2022 Sarah Smallhttps://www.ejpe.org/journal/article/view/703Review of Ralph Hertwig, Timothy J. Pleskac, and Thorsten Pachur’s Taming Uncertainty. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2019, xvii + 469 pp.2022-11-16T16:12:41+01:00James Grayotjames.grayot@gmail.com2022-12-05T00:00:00+01:00Copyright (c) 2022 James Grayothttps://www.ejpe.org/journal/article/view/715Review of José Luis Bermúdez's Frame It Again: New Tools for Rational Decision-Making. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2020, x + 340 pp.2022-12-06T10:36:20+01:00Bele Wollesenb.wollesen@lse.ac.ukLukas Beckbeck@mcc-berlin.net2022-12-06T00:00:00+01:00Copyright (c) 2022 Bele Wollesen, Lukas Beckhttps://www.ejpe.org/journal/article/view/706Review of Richard Pettigrew’s Dutch Book Arguments. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2020, 96 pp.2022-11-22T15:37:25+01:00Luc Lichtsteinerllichtst@gmail.com2022-12-12T00:00:00+01:00Copyright (c) 2022 Luc Lichtsteinerhttps://www.ejpe.org/journal/article/view/723Review of Juliana Bidadanure’s Justice Across Ages: Treating Young and Old as Equals. Oxford and New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2021, xi + 238 pp.2023-01-14T07:41:03+01:00Daniel Hallidaydaniel.halliday@unimelb.edu.au2023-01-14T00:00:00+01:00Copyright (c) 2022 Daniel Hallidayhttps://www.ejpe.org/journal/article/view/705Review of Jeff E. Biddle's Progress Through Regression: The Life Story of the Empirical Cobb-Douglas Production Function. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2021, xii + 334 pp.2022-11-22T14:51:34+01:00Aiko Ikeoaikoikeo@waseda.jp2023-01-26T00:00:00+01:00Copyright (c) 2022 Aiko Ikeohttps://www.ejpe.org/journal/article/view/638Economic Modeling in Rawls2022-09-14T15:05:04+02:00David C. Cokerdccoker@mindspring.com<p class="Body">Critics of Rawls's <em>A Theory of Justice </em>frequently envision his original position as containing a human consciousness. Thus, the re- strictions Rawls introduces for this ‘individual’—the lack of particular circumstantial and personal information—is considered a potential problem. The very ways in which Rawls circumscribes the knowledge available in this position is thought to compromise the personhood of the individual there, and hence as well the conclusions reached (that is, Rawls’s two principles). This paper will argue that, on the contrary, the lack of full personhood is a critical part of Rawls’s modeling strategy, and that Rawls borrowed this particular sense of modeling from eco- nomics. It is well known that Rawls worked to verse himself in economic theory, and it is difficult to overlook its use in <em>Theory</em>. It will be argued that it is through parallels with economic reasoning that Rawls’s original position model can be most fruitfully understood.</p>2023-01-23T00:00:00+01:00Copyright (c) 2022 David C. Cokerhttps://www.ejpe.org/journal/article/view/688The Making and Unmaking of Ordoliberal Language2022-07-27T17:20:02+02:00Anselm Küsterskuesters@lhlt.mpg.de2022-11-03T00:00:00+01:00Copyright (c) 2022 Anselm Küstershttps://www.ejpe.org/journal/article/view/694Methodology and Microfoundations2022-08-17T02:21:26+02:00Nadia Ruiznaruiz26@stanford.edu2022-11-25T00:00:00+01:00Copyright (c) 2022 Nadia Ruizhttps://www.ejpe.org/journal/article/view/707Why We Need to Talk About Preferences2022-11-22T15:44:52+01:00Lukas Beckbeck@mcc-berlin.net2022-12-06T00:00:00+01:00Copyright (c) 2022 Lukas Beckhttps://www.ejpe.org/journal/article/view/718Attitudes First2022-12-16T10:38:08+01:00Lisa Bastianl.bastian@vu.nl2022-12-16T00:00:00+01:00Copyright (c) 2022 Lisa Bastianhttps://www.ejpe.org/journal/article/view/657Social Engineers Changing the World2022-03-12T22:54:11+01:00Mariana Mortáguamariana_mortagua@iscte-iul.ptFrancisco Louçãflouc@iseg.ulisboa.pt<p>As part of a book symposium on Erwin Dekker's <em>Jan Tinbergen (1903–1994) and the Rise of Economic Expertise</em> (2021), Mariana Mortágua and Francisco Louçã reflect on the context of Tinbergen’s evolution and, more specifically, his change(s) of focus on how to engineer social progress compared to that of the closest of his colleagues, Ragnar Frisch.</p>2022-12-09T00:00:00+01:00Copyright (c) 2022 Francisco Louçã, Mariana Mortáguahttps://www.ejpe.org/journal/article/view/717Reading Tinbergen Through the Lens of Max Weber2022-12-09T14:45:14+01:00Thomas Kayzeltom.kayzel@xs4all.nl<p>As part of a book symposium on Erwin Dekker's <em>Jan Tinbergen (1903–1994) and the Rise of Economic Expertise</em> (2021), Thomas Kayzel reflects on Tinbergen being the 'ideal Weberian scientist' while also combining politics with science. </p>2022-12-09T00:00:00+01:00Copyright (c) 2022 Thomas Kayzelhttps://www.ejpe.org/journal/article/view/724Ambiguity of Superiority and Authority2023-01-16T18:32:11+01:00Jon Murphyjmmurphy@wcu.edu<p>As part of a book symposium on Erwin Dekker's <em>Jan Tinbergen (1903–1994) and the Rise of Economic Expertise</em> (2021), Jon Murphy reflects on Tinbergen's and Keynes's differing views on the role of experts underlying the Tinbergen-Keynes debate.</p>2023-01-16T00:00:00+01:00Copyright (c) 2022 Jon Murphyhttps://www.ejpe.org/journal/article/view/711Jan Tinbergen’s Fallacy2022-11-30T13:14:47+01:00Michele Alacevichmichele.alacevich@unibo.it<p class="p1">As part of a book symposium on Erwin Dekker's <em>Jan Tinbergen (1903–1994) and the Rise of Economic Expertise</em> (2021), Michele Alacevich reflects on Tinbergen's vision of economic expertise as a-political.</p>2022-11-30T00:00:00+01:00Copyright (c) 2022 Michele Alacevichhttps://www.ejpe.org/journal/article/view/708Tinbergen on the Theory and Policy of Economic Development2022-11-24T11:55:00+01:00Mauro Boianovskymboianovsky@gmail.com<p>As part of a book symposium on Erwin Dekker's <em>Jan Tinbergen (1903–1994) and the Rise of Economic Expertise</em> (2021), Mauro Boianovsky reflects on Tinbergen's 'uniqueness' among development economists in the post-war era.</p>2022-11-24T00:00:00+01:00Copyright (c) 2022 Mauro Boianovskyhttps://www.ejpe.org/journal/article/view/710Probability and Statistics in the Tinbergen-Keynes Debates2022-11-30T11:52:44+01:00William Pedenwilliampeden@ln.edu.hk<p class="p1">As part of a book symposium on Erwin Dekker's <em>Jan Tinbergen (1903–1994) and the Rise of Economic Expertise</em> (2021), William Peden reflects on shared views on the objectivity and nature of statistics between Tinbergen and Keynes underlying the Tinbergen-Keynes debates.</p>2022-11-30T00:00:00+01:00Copyright (c) 2022 William Pedenhttps://www.ejpe.org/journal/article/view/725Jan Tinbergen and the Limits of Expertise2023-01-31T16:33:24+01:00Erwin Dekkeredekker@mercatus.gmu.edu<p>As part of a book symposium on his <em>Jan Tinbergen (1903–1994) and the Rise of Economic Expertise</em> (2021), Erwin Dekker responds to commentaries by Mariana Mortágua and Francisco Louçã, Thomas Kayzel, Jon Murphy, Michele Alacevich, Mauro Boianovsky, and William Peden.</p>2023-01-31T00:00:00+01:00Copyright (c) 2022 Erwin Dekkerhttps://www.ejpe.org/journal/article/view/666Can Normative Accounts of Discrimination Be Guided by Anti-discrimination Law? Should They? 2022-06-01T15:05:01+02:00Rona Dinurrdinur@gmail.com<p>In her recent book, <em>Faces of Inequality </em>(2020), Moreau aims at developing a normative account of discrimination that is guided by the main features of anti-discrimination law. The critical comment argues against this methodology, indicating that due to indeterminacy relative to their underlying normative principles, central anti-discrimination norms cannot fulfill this guiding role. Further, using the content of such norms to guide ethical discussions is likely to be misleading, as it reflects evidentiary considerations that are unique to the legal context. The critical comment’s claims are developed based on a close examination of indirect discrimination (or disparate impact) norms, and, as such, have wider implications for ongoing moral and political debates that are heavily influenced by the content of these norms.</p>2022-11-06T00:00:00+01:00Copyright (c) 2022 Rona Dinur