Since most economic theories that discuss individual choices treat individuals as acting for reason, and thus in some way rationally, questions about the role that rationality plays in economics are of great importance. Rationality is often expressed by “Homo Economicus” through utility theory versus its identification through social terms by “Homo Sociologicus”. In this framework, business cycle theory is often rooted in assumptions regarding individual or collective rationality. Thus, the study of business cycles in combination with the concept of rationality may shed light on methodological issues. This paper focuses on the Austrian tradition because of its distinct characteristics: (a) the view that economics is part of the broader concept of political economy; (b) its antithesis to mathematical formalism, (c) its antithesis between ideal types and reality, (d) the struggle between groups for the distribution of wealth; and (v) methodological reductionism. Hence, investigating the methodological origins of these ideas in economics and re-evaluating the influences that shaped them is quite useful for promoting dialogue in the methodology of economics.

由于大多数讨论个人选择的经济理论都将个人视为理性行动，因此在某种程度上是理性的，因此关于理性在经济学中所起的作用的问题非常重要。理性通常由“经济人”通过效用理论来表达，而理性通常由“社会人”通过社会术语来表达。”。在这个框架中，商业周期理论通常植根于关于个人或集体理性的假设。因此，结合理性概念对商业周期的研究可能会阐明方法论问题。本文重点关注奥地利传统，因为它具有鲜明的特点：（a）经济学是更广泛的政治经济学概念的一部分的观点；(b) 它与数学形式主义的对立面，(c) 它在理想类型与现实之间的对立面，(d) 群体之间为分配财富而进行的斗争；(v) 方法论还原论。因此，调查这些思想在经济学中的方法论起源并重新评估形成它们的影响对于促进经济学方法论中的对话非常有用。