From behavioural economics to economics of identity: Forging an economic praxiology

Understanding human action is a vital task in economics. Not only is it about making sense of individuals, but endeavouring at a fundamental level to understand the reactions of individuals to economic policies. From this standpoint, “it is clear that the representative agent deserves a decent burial, as an approach to economic analysis that is not only primitive, but fundamentally erroneous” (Kirman, 1992, p. 119). Behavioural economics has drawn a considerable distance between itself and the simplified homo economicus view of human action. With experimental case studies as its bedrock, it has helped paint a broader picture of human action and hence forms part of a long tradition of praxiology. According to Gunnar Skirbekk’s anthology: “Praxiology in our sense is a conceptual analysis and reflective discussion of the way human activities are interwoven with their agents and with the things at which they are directed within our everyday world” (1983, p. 9). Skirbekk adds that in the Nordic tradition, praxiology is based on careful uses of examples invoking detailed descriptions and thought-experiments