Milton Friedman’s 1953 essay created controversy and consternation amongst economists. It provided a prescription, based on empirically generated predictive success, of how to do economics, yet many saw it as a concession of the search for truth and theoretical beauty within the discipline. This article reviews a 50th anniversary festschrift devoted to views of the essay. The purpose of the volume is to provide today’s reader with the essay, responses, and a guide to interpreting it. The volume is selective and several contributors have their own agendas, but the feeling of tumult the essay still engenders is nicely conveyed.
Alchian, A.A.1950. Uncertainty, evolution, and economic theory. The Journal of Political Economy58 (3): 211-21.
2.
Backhouse, R.E.2009. Friedman’s 1953 essay and the marginalist controversy . In The methodology of positive economics: Reflections on the Milton Friedman legacy, edited by U. Mäki.Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
3.
Blaug, M.2009. The debate over F53 after fifty years. In The methodology of positive economics: Reflections on the Milton Friedman legacy, edited by U. Mäki.Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
4.
Blume, L.E., and D. Easley.1992. Evolution and market behavior. Journal of Economic Theory58 (1): 9-40.
5.
Boland, L.A.1979. A critique of Friedman’s critics. Journal of Economic Literature17 (2): 503-22.
6.
Boland, L.A.1984. Methodology reply. The American Economic Review74 (4): 795-97.
7.
Caldwell, B.1982. Beyond positivism: Economic methodology in the twentieth century. London: George Allen & Unwin.
8.
De Vroey, M.2009. On the right side for the wrong reason: Friedman on the Marshall-Walras Divide. In The methodology of positive economics: Reflections on the Milton Friedman legacy, edited by U. Mäki.Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
9.
Friedman, M.1952. Comment. In A survey of contemporary economics , vol. 2, edited by B. F. Haley. Homewood, IL: Richard D. Irwin Haley.
10.
Friedman, M.1953a. Essays in positive economics. Chicago : University of Chicago Press.
11.
Friedman, M.1953b. The methodology of positive economics. In Essays in positive economics, edited by M. Friedman.Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
12.
Friedman, M., ed. 1956. Studies In the quantity theory of money. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
13.
Friedman, M.2009. Final word. In The methodology of positive economics: Reflections on the Milton Friedman legacy, edited by U. Mäki.Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
14.
Friedman, M., and R.D. Friedman.1998. Two lucky people. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
15.
Friedman, M., and L. Savage.1948. The utility analysis of choices involving risk. The Journal of Political Economy58 (3): 279-304.
16.
Friedman, M., and L. Savage.1952. The expected-utility hypothesis and the measurability of utility. The Journal of Political Economy60 (3): 463-474.
17.
Friedman, M., and A.J. Schwartz.1963. A monetary history of the United States, 1867-1960. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
18.
Haley, B. F., ed. 1952. A survey of contemporary economics, vol. 2. Homewood, IL: Richard D. Irwin.
19.
Hammond, J.D.2009. Early drafts of Friedman’s methodology essay. In The methodology of positive economics: Reflections on the Milton Friedman legacy, edited by U. Mäki.Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
20.
Hands, D.W.2009. Did Milton Friedman’s positive methodology license the formalist revolution? In The methodology of positive economics: Reflections on the Milton Friedman legacy, edited by U. Mäki.Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
21.
Hicks, J.R. [ 1939] 1946. Value and capital: An inquiry into some fundamental principles of economic theory. Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press.
22.
Hicks, J.R., and R.G.D. Allen.1934a. A reconsideration of the theory of value. Part I. Economica (New Series)1 (1): 52-76.
23.
Hicks, J.R., and R.G.D. Allen.1934b. A reconsideration of the theory of value. Part II. A mathematical theory of individual demand functions. Economica (New Series)1 (2): 196-219.
24.
Hoover, K.D.1984. Methodology: A comment on Boland and Frazer, II. The American Economic Review74 (4): 789-92.
25.
Hoover, K.D.2009. Milton Friedman’s stance: The methodology of causal realism. In The methodology of positive economics: Reflections on the Milton Friedman legacy, edited by U. Mäki.Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
26.
Mäki, U., ed. 2009a. The methodology of positive economics: Reflections on the Milton Friedman legacy. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press
27.
Mäki, U.2009b. Reading the methodological essay in twentieth-century economics: Map of multiple perspectives. In The methodology of positive economics: Reflections on the Milton Friedman legacy, edited by U. Mäki.Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
28.
Mäki, U.2009c. Unrealistic assumptions and unnecessary confusions: Rereading and rewriting F53 as a realist statement. In The methodology of positive economics: Reflections on the Milton Friedman legacy, edited by U. Mäki.Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
29.
Mayer, T.The Influence of Friedman’s methodological essay. In The methodology of positive economics: Reflections on the Milton Friedman legacy, edited by U. Mäki.Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
30.
Nelson, R.R., and S.G. Winter.1982. An evolutionary theory of economic change . Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
31.
Reder, M.W.Appraisal of evidence in economic methodology. In The methodology of positive economics: Reflections on the Milton Friedman legacy, edited by U. Mäki.Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
32.
Samuelson, Paul A. [ 1947] 1983. Foundations of economic analysis. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
33.
Samuelson, P.A., and W.A. Barnet.2007. Inside the economist’s mind: Conversations with eminent economists. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
34.
Serrano, D.T., and J.Z. Bonilla.2009. The politics of positivism: Disinterested predictions from interested agents. In The methodology of positive economics: Reflections on the Milton Friedman legacy, edited by U. Mäki.Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
35.
Snowdon, B., and H. R. Vane, eds. 1999. Conversations with leading economists: Interpreting modern macroeconomics. Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Publishing, Inc.
36.
Starmer, C.2009Expected utility and Friedman’s risky methodology . In The methodology of positive economics: Reflections on the Milton Friedman legacy, edited by U. Mäki.Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
37.
Stoppard, T.1967. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are dead. London: Faber and Faber.
38.
Vromen, J.2009. Friedman’s selection argument revisited. In The methodology of positive economics: Reflections on the Milton Friedman legacy , edited by U. Mäki.Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
39.
Williamson, O.E.2009. Friedman (1953) and the theory of the firm. In The methodology of positive economics: Reflections on the Milton Friedman legacy, edited by U. Mäki.Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
40.
Wilson, E.O.1998. Consilience: The unity of knowledge. New York: Knopf.
41.
Winter, S.G.1964. Economic "natural selection" and the theory of the firm . Yale Economic Essays4 (1): 225-72.
