Time to ask another question. I was wondering, how much does the form of explanation in economics appear to take the form of abductive reasoning?
Often in economics, we will observe a stylised fact. We then have a method that can explain that fact in a myriad of ways. We will then build a model that shows how a given cause will lead to that stylized fact, and pat ourselves on the back. But if this is really just a form of abductive logic, and there are a myriad of ways to “explain” said stylized fact, how can we have any confidence in our description – how can we really say that we have explained anything?