Six centers of methodological conflict in economics

The main ideological and practical centers of Iran’s challenges and problems in the economy include: the crisis of transparency, the crisis of unresolved differences and numerous political mistakes and its subsequent bad consequences. Undoubtedly, any move to get out of this situation must inevitably begin in the realm of thought. Therefore, the most vital way out is to stir up methodological discussions and the philosophy of economics, because this is the way to extract criteria which resulted in the clarification of the boundaries of science and non-science and by relying on stylized facts and less distorted arguments, levels of intersubjective consensus can be reached not only among economists and but also in the relationship between them and government officials. This study, citing the most prominent thinkers in the history of economics, aims to highlight and distinguish six centers of methodological conflict hoping that, by focusing the discussions in these subjects; a way will be taken to get out of the anomalies and malfunctions of the national socio-economic system. These six centers of methodological conflict are: the validity of the separation of the various aspects of collective life; the pillars of science: what can be imported and what cannot be imported; analogy and induction; the three levels of economic analysis (micro, macro, development) and different main central concerns and analytical tools and methods; limits of the application of mathematics in the wise understanding of economics; and finally, the extent of generalizability of theoretical written and translated propositions.