UNIFORMITY ASSUMPTIONS AND THE MUSGRAVE MÄKI-HINDRIKS DEBATE

In this paper I address the problem of the unrealisticness of assumptions in neoclassical economics. Being accused of using highly unrealistic assumptions in its models, neoclassical economics replied through what later was called the F-twist. Shortly stated, it was claimed that descriptively unrealistic assumptions are ubiquitous in other sciences also, and that economics should be concerned with its predictions instead of its assumptions. The immediate implication of this statement was that all unrealistic assumptions are the same – they are harmlessly unrealistic. Philosophers of economics vivaciously debated this claim and argued that economics made use of several kinds of assumptions which ”had better be true”. Building on this debate I introduce the notion of uniformity assumptions and I argue that in certain conditions they ”had better be true”.