Can neoclassical economics be social economics?
This retrospective suggests that it is best not to generalize that there is invariably a dichotomy between neoclassical and social economics, but to address the question in terms of individual economic thinkers. Belief in the virtues of the market and concern about identifying determinate optimal equilibrium solutions to problems does not necessarily preclude systematic criticism of the excesses of competition and recommendation of controls in the interest of the social whole. While Alfred Marshall, the founder of the neoclassical tradition, was typically reticent about offering policy prescriptions, this is not the case for his successor, A.C. Pigou. Analogously, there are contemporary thinkers, in particular Ronald Coase and William Baumol, who are neoclassical in their search for optimal free market solutions with full cognizance of the sometimes adverse effects of the price system. But the same claim cannot be made on behalf of “new classicals,” for their research program is to construct artificial or “robot” economic systems based on postulates of market clearing and self interest. Their quest for technical sophistication conceals an inherent ideological anti-policy bias.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 26 (1996)
Issue (Month): 1 (09)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.springer.com/economics/journal/12143|
|Order Information:||Web: http://link.springer.de/orders.htm|
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.:
- Warren Samuels, 1996.
"Can neoclassical economics be social economics?,"
Forum for Social Economics,
Springer, vol. 26(1), pages 1-4, 09.
- Veblen, Thorstein, 1900. "The Preconceptions of Economic Science III," History of Economic Thought Articles, McMaster University Archive for the History of Economic Thought, vol. 14.
- E. Weintraub, 1996. "Can neoclassical economics be social economics? A comment," Forum for Social Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(1), pages 39-40, January.
- Dam, Kenneth W, 1974. "The Evolution of North Sea Licensing Policy in Britain and Norway," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 17(2), pages 213-63, October.
- Blinder, Alan S, 1988. "The Fall and Rise of Keynesian Economics," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 64(187), pages 278-94, December.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:fosoec:v:26:y:1996:i:1:p:5-13. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Guenther Eichhorn)or (Christopher F Baum)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.