The Debate on the Nature of Welfare Economics in the Contemporary Methodology of Economics

In this article I describe dispute about whether welfare economics is normative economics, or the positive economics. The introduction to the discussion was a debate between Ezra Mishan and Pieter Hennipman in 1982–1984. It resulted in Mishan’s acceptation of the Hennipman’s view, that welfare economics is a part of the positive economics. After a couple of years the topic appeared back in the economic journals. In the first part of this article I present views of George Archibald, Pieter Hennipman and Yew-Kwang Ng,which treat welfare economics as a part of positive economics. In the second part I present contrary opinions of Mark Blaug. In the third part I present counterarguments, which (in my opinion) undermine Blaug’s position. I end with the hypothesis that dispute, which I described, can be caused-among others-by the existing, since the time of John Neville Keynes and Max Weber, ambiguity of the terms “positive economics” and “normative economics”.