IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/fosoec/v39y2010i2p191-208.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Autism in Economics? A Second Opinion

Author

Listed:
  • Klaus Mohn

Abstract

A popular claim among critics is that economic science is suffering from autism, a severe developmental disorder characterised by impairments in social relations and communication, combined with rigid and repetitive behaviour. So far, this allegation has not been substantiated. This essay explores the claim of autism in economics based on modern schemes of diagnostics. A key finding is that the structure of the critique against mainstream economics bears a striking resemblance to the structure of the diagnostic criteria for autism. Based on an examination of three groups of key symptoms, I conclude that the required set of criteria for the autism diagnosis are not met. However, there are parallels which may serve as constructive reminders for the future development and application of economic theories and models.

Suggested Citation

  • Klaus Mohn, 2010. "Autism in Economics? A Second Opinion," Forum for Social Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(2), pages 191-208, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:fosoec:v:39:y:2010:i:2:p:191-208
    DOI: 10.1007/s12143-008-9028-3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s12143-008-9028-3
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Arjo Klamer & Hendrik van Dalen, 2001. "Attention and the art of scientific publishing," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(3), pages 289-315.
    2. Bruno Frey & Stephan Meier, 2005. "Selfish and Indoctrinated Economists?," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 19(2), pages 165-171, April.
    3. Davis, John B., 2006. "The turn in economics: neoclassical dominance to mainstream pluralism?," Journal of Institutional Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 2(01), pages 1-20, April.
    4. Joseph Persky, 1995. "The Ethology of Homo Economicus," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 9(2), pages 221-231, Spring.
    5. Hosseini, Hamid, 2003. "The arrival of behavioral economics: from Michigan, or the Carnegie School in the 1950s and the early 1960s?," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 391-409, September.
    6. Thomas Mayer, 2002. "Improving communication in economics: a task for methodologists," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(1), pages 77-84.
    7. David Colander, 2005. "The Making of an Economist Redux," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 19(1), pages 175-198, Winter.
    8. Colander, David, 2003. "The Aging of an Economist," Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Cambridge University Press, vol. 25(02), pages 157-176, June.
    9. Tony Lawson, 2006. "The nature of heterodox economics," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 30(4), pages 483-505, July.
    10. von Hayek, Friedrich August, 1989. "The Pretence of Knowledge," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 79(6), pages 3-7, December.
    11. Erik Angner, 2006. "Economists as experts: Overconfidence in theory and practice," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(1), pages 1-24.
    12. Thomas Mayer, 2001. "The role of ideology in disagreements among economists: a quantitative analysis," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(2), pages 253-273.
    13. Machlup, Fritz, 1978. "Methodology of Economics and Other Social Sciences," Elsevier Monographs, Elsevier, edition 1, number 9780124645509 edited by Shell, Karl.
    14. Bruno S. Frey & Reiner Eichenberger, 1993. "American and European Economics and Economists," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 7(4), pages 185-193, Fall.
    15. Rik Pieters & Hans Baumgartner, 2002. "Who Talks to Whom? Intra- and Interdisciplinary Communication of Economics Journals," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 40(2), pages 483-509, June.
    16. Padma Desai, 2005. "Russian Retrospectives on Reforms from Yeltsin to Putin," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 19(1), pages 87-106, Winter.
    17. Smith, Adam, 1776. "An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations," History of Economic Thought Books, McMaster University Archive for the History of Economic Thought, number smith1776.
    18. Elster, Jon, 1989. "Social Norms and Economic Theory," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 3(4), pages 99-117, Fall.
    19. D. Wade Hands, 2002. "Economic methodology is dead - long live economic methodology: thirteen theses on the new economic methodology," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(1), pages 49-63.
    20. Alan Kirman, 2006. "Heterogeneity in Economics," Journal of Economic Interaction and Coordination, Springer;Society for Economic Science with Heterogeneous Interacting Agents, vol. 1(1), pages 89-117, May.
    21. Richard H. Thaler, 2000. "From Homo Economicus to Homo Sapiens," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 14(1), pages 133-141, Winter.
    22. Colin F. Camerer & Richard H. Thaler, 1995. "Anomalies: Ultimatums, Dictators and Manners," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 9(2), pages 209-219, Spring.
    23. Edward P. Lazear, 2000. "Economic Imperialism," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 115(1), pages 99-146.
    24. Ariel Rubinstein, 2006. "A Sceptic's Comment on the Study of Economics," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 116(510), pages 1-9, March.
    25. Ben Fine, 2002. ""Economic imperialism": a view from the periphery," Review of Radical Political Economics, Union for Radical Political Economics, vol. 34(2), pages 187-201, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:fosoec:v:39:y:2010:i:2:p:191-208. 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: (Chris Longhurst). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RFSE20 .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.