Bitte verwenden Sie diesen Link, um diese Publikation zu zitieren, oder auf sie als Internetquelle zu verweisen: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/211461 
Autor:innen: 
Erscheinungsjahr: 
2019
Schriftenreihe/Nr.: 
Texto para Discussão No. 2510
Verlag: 
Instituto de Pesquisa Econômica Aplicada (IPEA), Brasília
Zusammenfassung (übersetzt): 
The present text deals with the importance of methodological debates in research organizations that formulate studies, proposals and appraisals of public policies. They should be open to diversity and innovation of conceptions, interpretations and methods. The text also expounds this methodological vision: to a large extent, scientific knowledge consists of conjectures and educated guesses, connected overall in a uncertain and fallible web. The connection is often made by means of nondemonstrative logic. Some subjective elements enter into nearly all arguments, inferences and reasonings. Hence, appraisals of almost all of them are personal. In science, alongside abundant disagreements, there are agreements and settlements; but there are no factual truths that may be definitely established by holders of a rank or position in any organization.
Schlagwörter: 
educated guess
nondemonstrative logic
subjective probability
tacit knowledge
JEL: 
B40
Dokumentart: 
Working Paper

Datei(en):
Datei
Größe
695.1 kB





Publikationen in EconStor sind urheberrechtlich geschützt.