This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

The future for schools of thought in pluralist economics

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Sheila C. Dow (Department of Economics, University of Stirling, Scotland)

Additional information is available for the following registered author(s):

Abstract

An occasion such as this first ICAPE conference reflects an increasing coherence, and openness to communication, among the different strands of economics. The purpose of this paper is to address the questions this raises as to whether or not there is still a useful role for the concept of schools of thought. We explore first the categories of orthodox economics and heterodox economics and how we can expect them to develop in the future. In particular, is the relationship between orthodoxy and heterodoxy dualistic, and if so where does this leave pluralism in general and schools of thought within heterodox economics in particular? The meaning of pluralism is explored further with respect to heterodox economics, and the notion of structured pluralism is developed. Structured pluralism can be understood in terms of categories, connections and absence of connections, which, like pluralism, can be applied at a variety of levels. Categories are necessary for knowledge, and some (incomplete) connectivity is necessary for the process of building up new knowledge. The social system, similarly, functions by means of the categorisation of institutions, and (incomplete) connections between them. In the same way, schools of thought are a necessary part of the process of building up and communicating economic knowledge, within a pluralist framework. It is concluded therefore that schools of thought will continue to play an important role in terms of different communities and approaches within heterodox economics. But it is in the nature of structured pluralism that the structure is partial, and thus not all-encompassing. It is also provisional and therefore subject to change. In this way schools of thought are enabling rather than constraining.

Download Info
To download:

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. Information about this may be contained in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help file. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://www.sceme.org.uk/wps/SCEME005_DowSPluralism_2003.pdf
File Format: application/pdf
File Function:
Download Restriction: no

Publisher Info
Paper provided by SCEME in its series SCEME Working Papers: Advances in Economic Methodology with number 005/2003.

Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML, plain text, BibTeX, RIS (EndNote), ReDIF
Length: 13 pages
Date of creation: Jan 2003
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:sti:wpaper:005/2003

Contact details of provider:
Email:
Web page: http://www.sceme.org.uk/
More information through EDIRC

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Matthias Klaes).

Related research
Keywords: pluralism heterodox-economics

Other versions of this item:

Find related papers by JEL classification:
B4 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - Economic Methodology

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

  1. Davis, John B, 1999. "Common Sense: A Middle Way between Formalism and Post-Structuralism?," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 23(4), pages 503-15, July.
  2. Matthias Klaes, 2004. "Evolutionary economics: In defence of ‘vagueness’," SCEME Working Papers: Advances in Economic Methodology 006/2004, SCEME. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
  3. Lawson, Tony, 1994. "Why Are So Many Economists So Opposed to Methodology?," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor and Francis Journals, vol. 1(1), pages 105-33, June.
  4. Chick, Victoria & Dow, Sheila C, 2001. "Formalism, Logic and Reality: A Keynesian Analysis," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 25(6), pages 705-21, November.
  5. Sheila C. Dow, 2000. "Prospects For The Progress Of Heterodox Economics," Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Taylor and Francis Journals, vol. 22(2), pages 157-170, June. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
Full references

Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? About 750 journals are listed on RePEc.

This page was last updated on 2008-7-14.


This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.