La controverse sur l'entreprise (1940-1950) et la formation de l''irréalisme méthodologique' (The Controversy About the Neoclassical Theory of the Firm and the Formation of 'Methodological Irrealism')

French Abstract: Durant les annees 1940-1950, la theorie neo-classique de l'entreprise a pu sembler quelquefois menacee. Certains economistes d'Oxford developpent alors une doctrine du "cout total" qu'ils presentent comme antagonique du marginalisme, tandis que l'American Economic Review publie des travaux heterodoxes sur la courbe de cout moyen et sur les regles de decision appliquees par les chefs d'entreprise. On se propose ici d'analyser ces differentes objections, ainsi que les strategies de reponse mises au point par les defenseurs de l'approche traditionnelle (et notamment par Machlup). On montre que les critiques des "antimarginalistes" ont ete inoperantes, partie a cause de leurs faiblesses logiques et techniques, partie a cause de la double reformulation que les "marginalistes" font subir a la theorie de l'entreprise durant la controverse. D'une part, la theorie parvient a eviter certaines objections lorsqu'elle choisit de se definir par l'hypothese abstraite de maximisation des profits, et non par l'existence ou les proprietes des courbes marginales. D'autre part, et plus fondamentalement, l'adoption d'un principe d' "irrealisme methodologique" a permis de la mettre a l'abri de toute objection psychologisante, voire de certaines difficultes revelees par l'analyse statique ou l'analyse de statique comparative. L'article s'efforce tout particulierement de preciser cette reformulation methodologique, qui anticipe la these celebre de Friedman en 1953 et une position devenue banale aujourd'hui. Il analyse contextuellement la notion d'"irrealisme", en montrant de quelle maniere elle fonctionne comme un systeme de protection ad hoc difficilement justifiable du point de vue d'une philosophie des sciences rigoureuse.Cet article, qui a d'abord paru dans Economies et societes, serie Oeconomia, 1986, no 5, p. 95-151, vient d'etre a nouveau publie dans Economies et societes, serie Histoire de la pensee economique, 2014, no 11-12, p. 1805-1860, avec une preface qui est reproduite ici. English Abstract: The 1940s and 1950s witnessed a crisis in the neoclassical theory of the firm. Some Oxford economists put forward the "full-cost pricing" doctrine which they thought to be an alternative to marginalism -- the then prevailing form of neoclassicism in the theory of the firm. At the same time, the American Economic Review published various pieces on cost curves and the routines followed by business men, which were also directed against marginalism. The present article analyzes all these critical points and the answers they triggered in the marginalist camp. It is shown that the heterodox attack missed its target, partly because of its own weaknesses, partly because of the changes, both technical and methodological, which orthodox theory underwent during this "marginalist controversy" itself. First of all, some objections could be dealt with easily once the abstract hypothesis of profit-maximisation was made central to the theory of the firm, and economists began regarding marginal and average cost curves as paraphernalia. Second, and more importantly, without yet the word and without any conceptual elaboration, a methodology of "irrealism" akin to Friedman's was already practiced in the neoclassical camp. This is how every psychological objection whatsoever, as well as some potentially embarrassing objections to static or comparative static analysis, were disposed of. The article goes on examining the connections between the controversy and Friedman's later "Methodology of Positive Economics", with a view of interpreting the latter contextually. It becomes clear how "methodological irrealism" offered an ad hoc metatheoretical solution to a theoretical crisis, an outcome that seems hardly desirable from the viewpoint of intellectual progress.This article was written in French, under the title "La controverse sur l'entreprise (1940-1950) et la formation de l'"irrealisme methodologique"" and first published in Economies et societes, serie Oeconomia, 1986, no 5, p. 95-151. It has recently been republished by Economies et societes, serie Histoire de la pensee economique, 2014, no 11-12, p. 1805-1860, with a foreword that is also reproduced here. The foreword emphasizes that Friedman's "Methodology of Positive Economics" should be interpreted contextually, by being connected with theoretical concerns of the time, and not as if it were a genuine piece of philosophy of science.