Avusturya İktisat Okulu’nun Metodolojik İlkeleri

Year 2025, Issue: 118, 231 - 252, 18.06.2025

Muhammet Buğra Sucu

https://doi.org/10.36484/liberal.1632210

Abstract

Avusturya İktisat Okulu (AİO), on dokuzuncu yüzyılın sonlarında Carl Menger tarafından kurulmuş ve insan eylemi merkezli bir ekonomik yaklaşım geliştirmiştir. AİO’nun metodolojisi, ana akım neoklasik iktisattan farklılaşarak subjektivizm, metodolojik bireycilik ve praksiyoloji gibi temel ilkeler üzerine inşa edilmiştir. AİO’nun temel argümanı, iktisadi analizlerin bireylerin öznel tercihleri ve dinamik planlamaları üzerinden gerçekleştirilmesi gerektiğidir. Matematiksel modelleme yerine, nedensel analiz ve sözel mantık, Avusturya yaklaşımının temel araçlarıdır.

Bu çalışma, AİO’nun metodolojik özgünlüğünü, neoklasik iktisatla arasındaki temel farkları ele almaktadır. AİO’nun düşünce yapısı, sadece ekonomik analizlere değil, aynı zamanda disiplinler arası çalışmalara da ilham kaynağı olmuştur. İnsan davranışlarının karmaşıklığını ve öngörülemezliğini merkeze alan bu yaklaşım, modern iktisadi düşüncenin evriminde önemli bir dönüm noktasıdır.

Keywords

Avusturya İktisat Okulu , subjektivizm , metodolojik bireycilik , praksiyoloji

The Methodological Principles of the Austrian School of Economics

Abstract

The Austrian School of Economics (ASE) was founded in the late nineteenth century by Carl Menger and developed an economic approach centered on human action. The methodology of the ASE diverges from mainstream neoclassical economics and is built upon fundamental principles such as subjectivism, methodological individualism, and praxeology The core argument of the ASE is that economic analyses should be conducted based on subjective preferences and dynamic planning of individuals. Instead of mathematical modeling, causal analysis and verbal logic are the primary tools of the Austrian approach.

This study examines the methodological distinctiveness of the ASE and its fundamental differences from neoclassical economics. The intellectual framework of the Austrian School has inspired not only economic analyses but also interdisciplinary studies. By placing the complexity and unpredictability of human behavior at its core, this approach represents a significant turning point in the evolution of modern economic thought.

Keywords

Austrian School of Economics , subjectivism , methodological individualism , praxeology

References

• Aktan, C. C., & Eroğlu, M. Y. (2018). Avusturya İktisat Okulu: Menger’den Mises’e; Hayek’den Kirzner’e. Hukuk ve İktisat Araştırmaları Dergisi, 10(2), 111–142.
• Alada, D. (1993). Avusturya iktisat ekolü metodolojisine dair notlar: bir kitap. İstanbul Üniversitesi Siyasal Bilgiler Fakültesi Dergisi, 3-4–5. Alter, M. (1990). What do we know about Menger?. History of political economy, 22, 313-348.
• Boettke, P. J. (2023). Methodological Individualism and the Austrian School of Economics. Handbook of Methodoligical Individualism. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4450077
• Boettke, P. J., Lavoie, D., & Storr, V. H. (2001). 19 The subjectivist methodology of Austrian economics and Dewey’s theory of inquiry. Dewey, pragmatism and economic methodology, 327.
• Boettke, P. J., & Coyne, C. J. (Eds.). (2015). The Oxford handbook of Austrian economics. Oxford University Press.
• Boettke, P. J., & Coyne, C. J. (2023). New thinking in Austrian economics. Annual Review of Economics, 15(1), 329-347.
• Chamlee-Wright, E., & Storr, V. H. (2015). Social economy as an extension of the Austrian research program. The Oxford handbook of Austrian economics, 247-271.
• Coase, R. H. (1999). International Society of New Institutional Economics. https://www.coase.org/coasespeech.htm, Son Erişim 04.06.2025
• Egger, J. B. (1978). The Austrian Method. L. M. Spadaro (Ed.), New Directions in Austrian Economics. (p. 19-39). Sheed Andrews and McMeel, INC. Subsidiary of Universal Press Syndicate Kansas City.
• Espinas, A. (1890). Les origines de la technologie. Revue Philosophique de La France et de l’Étranger, 30, 113–135. http://www.jstor.org/stable/41073426
• Foss, N. J. (1997). Austrian Economics and the Theory of the Firm (No. 97-3). Department of Industrial Economics and Strategy, Copenhagen Business School.
• Friedman, M. (1966). The methodology of positive economics. In Essays In Positive Economics. (pp. 3-16, 30-43).
• Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press. https://www.wiwiss.fu-berlin.de/fachbereich/bwl/pruefungs-steuerlehre/loeffler/Lehre/bachelor/investition/Friedman_the_methology_of_positive_economics.pdf
• Furubotn, E. G., & Richter, R. (2010). Institutions and economic theory: the contribution of the new institutional economics: Second edition. In Institutions and Economic Theory: The Contribution of the New Institutional Economics: Second Edition. The University of Michigan Press.
• Garnett Jr, R. F. (2006). Paradigms and pluralism in heterodox economics. Review of Political Economy, 18(4), 521-546.
• Gordon, D. (2004). İktisadi matığa giriş. (çev. Bahadır Akın). Liberte Yayınları. (Eserin orijinali 2000’de yayımlandı).
• Hayek, F. A. (1945). The use of knowledge in society. The American Economic Review, 35(4), 519–530. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1809376
• Hayek, F. A. (1973). Law, Legislation and Liberty. Rules and Order. (Vol. 1) University of Chicago Press.
• Hayek, F. A. (1988). The fatal conceit: The errors of socialism. Routledge.
• Hayek, F. A. (1995). Kölelik yolu. (çev. Turhan Feyzioğlu ve Yıldıray Arsan). Liberte Yayınları.
• Hayek, F. A. (2013). Law, Legislation and Liberty: A New Statement of the Liberal Principles of Justice. (Vol. 1, Vol. 2. Vol. 3). Routledge.
• Herbener, J. (1997), “The Pareto rule and welfare economics”, Review of Austrian Economics, 10 (1), 70–106.
• Jędruchniewicz, A. (2016). The Methodology of the Austrian School of Economics. Argumenta Oeconomica Cracoviensia, 14, 9–28. https://doi.org/10.15678/aoc.2016.1401
• Kirzner, I. M. (1978). Economics and error. L. M. Spadaro (Ed.), New Directions in Austrian Economics. (p. 57-76). Sheed Andrews and McMeel, INC. Subsidiary of Universal Press Syndicate Kansas City.
• Kirzner, I. M. (2000). The driving force of the market: Essays in Austrian economics. Routledge.
• Lachmann, L. M. (1970). The legacy of Max Weber. Heinemann.
• Lachmann, L. M. (1978). An Austrian stocktaking: unsettled questions and tentative answers. L. M. Spadaro (Ed.), New directions in austrian economics. (p. 1-18). Sheed Andrews and McMeel, INC. Subsidiary of Universal Press Syndicate Kansas City.
• Lachmann, L. M. (2005). Expectations and the meaning of institutions. Essays in economics by Ludwig Lachmann. Ed. D. Lavoie. Taylor & Francis e-Library. First published 1994 by Routledge.
• Leoni, B., & Frola, E. (1977). On mathematical thinking in economics. Journal of Libertarian Studies, 1(2), 101-09.
• Leube, K. R. (2010). On Menger, Hayek and on the Concept of ‘Verstehen’. In Austrian Economics in Transition: From Carl Menger to Friedrich Hayek (pp. 257-275). London: Palgrave Macmillan UK.
• Littlechild, S. C. (1979). The fallacy of the mixed economy : an “Austrian” critique of conventional economics and government policy. Cato Institute. https://books.google.com/books/about/The_Fallacy_of_the_Mixed_Economy.html?hl=tr&id=Ej7uAAAAMAAJ
• Machlup, F. (2004). Ludwig von Mises: The academic scholar who would not compromise. https://mises.org/mises-daily/ludwig-von-mises-scholar-who-would-not-compromise
• Madison, G. B. (1990). How individualistic is methodological individualism? Critical Review, 4(1-2), 41–60. doi:10.1080/08913819008459592
• Menger, C. (2004). Principles of Economics. Ludwig von Mises Institute; electronic online edition.
• Menger, C. (1963). Problems of economics and sociology. University of Illinois Press
• Mises, L. von. (1949). Human action: a treatise on economics. Yale University.
• Mises, L. von. (1998). Human action: a treatise on economics the scholar’s edition. Ludvig von Mises Institute. Auburn, Alabama.
• Mises, L. von. (2007). Sosyalizm: iktisadi ve sosyolojik bir tahlil. (çev. Yusuf Şahin). Liberte Yayınları. (Eserin orijinali 1932’de yayımlandı).
• O’Driscoll, G. P. J., & Rizzo, M. J. (1985). The economics of time and ignorance. Blackwell.
• Parsons, S. D. (1997). Mises, the A Priori, and the Foundations of Economics: A Qualified Defence. Economics and Philosophy, 13(02), 175. doi:10.1017/s0266267100004478
• Prendergast, C. (1986). Alfred Schutz and the Austrian School of Economics. American Journal of Sociology, 92(1), 1–26. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2779715
• Prychitko, D. L. (1990). Methodological individualism and the austrian school: A note on its critics. Journal des économistes et des études humaines, 1(1), 171-180.
• Rizzo, M. J. (1978). Praxeology and econometrics: a critique of positivist economics. L. M. Spadaro (Ed.), New Directions in Austrian Economics. (p. 40-56). Sheed Andrews and McMeel, INC. Subsidiary of Universal Press Syndicate Kansas City.
• Robbins, L. (1935), An essay on the nature and signifi cance of economic science, 2nd ed., London: Macmillan
• Robitaille, C. (2024). The Austrian school of economics and interpretive sociology: Some epistemological complementarities and divergences. Revue européenne des sciences sociales, 622(2), 137-163.
• Rothbard, M. (1956), “Toward a reconstruction of utility and welfare economics”, in: M. Sennholz (ed.), On Freedom and Free Enterprise: Essays in Honor of Ludwig von Mises, Princeton, NJ: Van Nostrand, 224–262.
• Rothbard, M. N. (1962). Man, economy and state (Vols. 1-2). Nash Publishing. https://mises.org/library/man-economy-and-state-power-and-market
• Rothbard, M. N. (1976). Praxeology: The methodology of Austrian economics. The foundations of modern Austrian economics, 19-39.
• Rothbard, M. N. (1995). The present state of Austrian economics. Journal des Economistes et des Etudes humaines, 6(1), 43-90.
• Rothbard, M. N. (2011). Economic controversies. Ludwig von Mises Institute.
• Schleifer, R. (2018). Literary Modernism and Economics. The Bloomsbury Companion to Modernist Literature, 393.
• Schulak, E. M., & Unterkofler, H. (2011). Austrian school of economics: a history of its ideas, ambassadors, and institutions. Ludwig von Mises Institute.
• Smith, B. (1990). On the Austrianness of Austrian economics. Critical Review, 4(1-2), 212–238. doi:10.1080/08913819008459601
• Spadaro, L. M. (1978). New directions in Austrian economics. Sheed Andrews and McMeel, INC. Subsidiary of Universal Press Syndicate Kansas City.
• Stigler, G. J. (1950). The Development of Utility Theory. I. Journal of Political Economy, 58(4), 307–327. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1828885
• Tobin, J. (1985). Neoclassical Theory in America: JB Clark and Fisher. The American Economic Review, 75(6), 28-38.
• Vaughn, K. I. (1994). Austrian economics in America: The migration of a tradition. Cambridge University Press.
• Weber, M. (2014). Toplumsal ve ekonomik örgütlenme Kuramı. (çev. Özer Ozankaya). Cem Yayınevi. (Eserin Orijinali 1947’de yayımlandı).
• Wiśniewski, J. B. (2014). The methodology of the Austrian school of economics: The present state of knowledge. Ekonomia-Wroclaw Economic Review, 20(1), 39-54.
• White, L. H. (1984). The Methodology of the Austrian School Economists. The Ludwig von Mises Institute of Auburn University, 4–40.
• Yeager, L. B. (1954). The methodology of Henry George and Carl Menger. American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 13(3), 233–238. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1536-7150.1954.tb02415.x
• Yay, T., & Aktan, C. C. (2021). Avusturya İktisat Okulu. Astana Yayınları.
• Yu, F. L. T., & Shiu, G. M. C. (2011). A new look at the Austrian School of Economics: review and prospects. International Journal of Pluralism and Economics Education, 2(2), 145. https://doi.org/10.1504/ijpee.2011.041695