Abstract
In the last decade, with the
publication of his Complete Works, there has been renewed interest in Walras’s
methodology, mostly in the French economic literature. In particular, some
scholars have argued that Walras characteristically confused positive and
normative statements, a mistake all the more surprising given his impressive
knowledge of philosophy (the so-called ‘Walras paradox’). This paper reviews
these recent studies and, in particular, it contests the solution to the Walras
paradox offered by R. Koppl. For Koppl, the paradox is explained by the
fact that Walras was influenced by philosophers who did not distinguish between
positive and normative statements. More precisely, the French philosopher
E. Vacherot inspired him to an idealist theory of knowledge, where
preconceived notions of justice could be defended as truths. This paper
contests such a conclusion: Vacherot’s theory of science was not idealist and
did not sanction a confusion of positive and normative statements. The Walras
paradox could even be non-existent after all.