Vis enkel innførsel

dc.contributor.authorZhang, Tong
dc.date.accessioned2022-11-19T11:20:24Z
dc.date.available2022-11-19T11:20:24Z
dc.date.created2021-09-20T12:54:11Z
dc.date.issued2021
dc.identifier.citationMax Weber Studies. 2021, 21 (2), 203-212.en_US
dc.identifier.issn1470-8078
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11250/3032970
dc.description.abstractIn the last two decades, there have been two influential papers in empirical economic growth, Becker and Woessmann (2009) and Acemoglu, Johnson, and Robinson (2001), which explicitly or implicitly claim that Weber's thesis has been refuted by empirical evidence. This paper argues that their alleged refutation of Weber is achieved by serious distortions and reductions of Weber's thesis combined with a sequence of unsubstantiated extrapolations.en_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherMax Weber Studiesen_US
dc.relation.urihttps://www.jstor.org/stable/10.15543/maxweberstudies.21.2.203?refreqid=excelsior%3A3dd3543bf4b2bdfb2fcf567e6dfa97a2
dc.subjectØkonometriske og statistiske metoder: generelten_US
dc.subjectEconometric and statistical methods: generalen_US
dc.subjectProtestantisk etikken_US
dc.subjectProtestant Ethicsen_US
dc.subjectMax Weberen_US
dc.subjectØkonomisk veksten_US
dc.subjectEconomic growthen_US
dc.subjectTheodicéproblemeten_US
dc.subjectTheodicyen_US
dc.subjectSammenlignende religionskunnskapen_US
dc.subjectComparative Religionen_US
dc.titleWas Weber Really Wrong? A Comment on Some Recent Empirical Studies on Economic Growthen_US
dc.typeJournal articleen_US
dc.description.versionacceptedVersionen_US
dc.subject.nsiVDP::Sosiologi: 220en_US
dc.subject.nsiVDP::Sociology: 220en_US
dc.source.pagenumber203-212en_US
dc.source.volume21en_US
dc.source.journalMax Weber Studiesen_US
dc.source.issue2en_US
dc.identifier.cristin1935989
cristin.ispublishedtrue
cristin.fulltextpostprint
cristin.fulltextpostprint


Tilhørende fil(er)

Thumbnail

Denne innførselen finnes i følgende samling(er)

Vis enkel innførsel