53

Mainstream economics is built on a strong separation between positive and normative economics, a distinction originating in Hume's dichotomy between “is” and “ought to.” The former describes aspect of the economy dealing with the allocation of scarce resources through both positive and objective statements, whereas the latter can only prescribe policies for using this scarcity through normative and subjective statements. The terms ”normative” and “subjective” mean that these statements rest upon value judgments that cannot be universalized and hence are neither true nor false. In its purest form, the model of a market economy with perfect competition is not compatible with any form of government. Economic actors are always maximizers of their own interests. In fact, that is the most striking feature of their personality, if not the only one. Moreover, the market, as the second pillar of the system, translates the demand and supply for goods and services into prices. This paper takes issue with these two pillars. The idea is to replace the notions of economic rationality and market by a locus in which pragmatic action and institutions can give greater substance to an excessively mechanical human actor. Through this shift, it becomes possible to think of the concept of methodological individualism as a legal, social, and intersubjective category.