查詢結果分析
來源資料
相關文獻
- The Distinction between Causation and Invariance and its Implications for the Philosophical Discussion of Economic Theorizing
- Invariant Image Matching by Compacting and Moment Normalization
- 具隨機碎形特性之設計暴雨雨型
- Fractal Analysis in Colloidal Science
- 舷外機(內外機)型動力小船操船性能之研究
- 均勻性的偏差度量
- 多元計分三參數試題選項分析固定效應模式
- 不變性光學相關器
- 臺灣加權股價指數與融資、融券餘額之研究--向量誤差修正模型之應用
- Multiple Touching Product Detection and Locating Using Rotation Invariant Filter
頁籤選單縮合
題 名 | The Distinction between Causation and Invariance and its Implications for the Philosophical Discussion of Economic Theorizing=起因性與不變性之區別與其對經濟理論建構之哲學探討的關聯 |
---|---|
作 者 | 陳思廷; | 書刊名 | 國立臺灣大學哲學論評 |
卷 期 | 26 2003.03[民92.03] |
頁 次 | 頁51-90 |
分類號 | 550 |
關鍵詞 | 經濟解釋; 起因性; 操縱性; 不變性; 弱外生性; 超外生性; 起因結構; 經濟理論建構的起因結構式闡釋; 經濟理論發展; Economic explanation; Causation; Manipulation; Invariance; Weak exogeneity; Superexogeneity; Causal structure; Causal structuralist account of economic theorizing; Economic theory development; |
語 文 | 英文(English) |
中文摘要 | 近年來,有些哲學家主張解釋關係可以視為是一種起因關係;而這一種起因關係的內涵,基本上可視為與被操縱的相關變數間之關係的不變性有關-亦即,與一種可操縱的不變關係有關。這種可操縱性理論傾向於將起因關係化約為可操縱的不變關係。然而,藉由對一個當代計量經濟學案例之研討,本篇論文主張只有當目標關係在其所賴以生成的因果鍵或起因結構是不受其他干擾因素影響的情況下,可操縱的不變關係才有可能成立。換言之,可操縱的不變關係僅可被視為一種特殊的起因關係;也因此,不變性的概念絕不能取代起因性的概念。再者,本篇論文的論述也顯示:對起因性與不變性作區分,將對經濟理論建構與經濟理論發展之哲學探討有其方法上的重要意義。 1. 導論 2. 操縱性,不變性,超外生性,及起因結構 2.1可操縱性的起因理論 2.2弱外生性的概念 2.3不變性的概念及其與超外生性概念之間的關係 2.4我們能等同起因關係與不變關係嗎? 3. 起因性與不變性的區分在方法論上的重要意義 4. 對經濟理論建構與經濟理論發展給一個起因結構式的闡釋 5. 結論 |
英文摘要 | Recently, certain philosophers have argued that an explanatory relation is a causal relation that is fundamentally about the invariance of a relation between variables of interest under intervention - i.e., about a manipulable invariant relation. This manipulative theory tends to reduce a causal relation to a manipulable invariant relation. By explicating a case from contemporary econometrics, this paper argues that a manipulable invariant relation can be obtained only when the causal chain or causal structure of the targeted relation is free from disturbing influences. In other words, a manipulable invariant relation can be regarded only as a special kind of causal relation, and so the notion of invariance can never replace the idea of causation. This paper also shows that the distinction between causation and invariance has methodological import concerning the philosophical discussion of economic theorizing and of economic theory development. |
本系統中英文摘要資訊取自各篇刊載內容。