V rámci filosofie věd panuje široká shoda na tom, že druhá polovina 20. století složila „labutí píseň“ pozitivismu. Milton Friedman a Paul Samuelson, dva klíčoví autoři k metodologii ekonomie v daném časovém období, přitom tento vývoj ve filosoifi vědy prý nikdy nereflektovali. Pozitivistická východiska – v prvé řadě v podobě redukcionistického přístupu – jsou tudíž stále přítomna ve vlivných teoretických konceptech rozvinutých ekonomy hlavního proudu. Značný počet autorů však v současnosti sdílí náhled, že tyto koncepty v nezanedbatelné míře přispěly k vývoji, jenž ústil ve finanční krizi, vrcholící v letech 2008 a 2009. Předkládaný článek se proto táže, zda to byla právě krize – v níž mnozí spatřují empirické zamítnutí řady pozitivistických konceptů – která napsala „labutí píseň“ pozitivismu v ekonomii hlavního proudu., It has been widely accepted that philosophers of science wrote a “swansong” for positivism during the second half of the 20th century. Milton Friedman and Paul Samuelson, major contributors in the field of economic methodology at the time, the argument goes, did never reflect the demise. Therefore, positivist roots – primarily in the form of reductionist approach – are still to be found in influential theoretical concepts developed by mainstream economists. However, quite a large number of scholars currently share the view that these concepts contributed in a nonnegligible manner to the development leading to the financial crisis culminating in 2008 and 2009. the article thus asks if it is the crisis – seen by many as an empirical rejection of many positivistic concepts – that wrote a “swansong” for positivism in mainstream economics., and Lukáš Kovanda.
The moderate interpretation of the Thomas´Theorem suggests little more than a failure at the assessment of objective situation. Its radical interpretation allows thinking the existence of new social reality. The postmodern condition facilitates this understanding. The underlying idea is not recent; Marx´s theory is a precurson to the constructionist approach. The canonical foundations of social constructionism were laid by Berger and Luckmann, who sought to reconcile Weberian and Durkheimian traditions in their concept of the social construction of reality. Phenomena like gender or consumerism appear to be suitable objects for such an approach. Attribution of meaning in culture nonetheless offers to expand the principle to any domain and, in some cases, such as the labeling theory of deviation, its tries its own limits. Applied to science itself, the pricniple raises questions about the status of scientific knowledge that circumvent epistemological issues. Social consturctionism is itself surpassed by the linguistic turn and discursive theories of soicety. The notion of society as text may challenge realist and objectivist positions. In order to remain productive, however, the notion must retain the presupposition of order and rules of reading and thus admit that, actually, society is not merely a text., Miloslav Petrusek., and Obsahuje použitou literaturu