IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wea/econth/v6y2017i1p16.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Bourgeois Ideology and Mathematical Economics – A Reply to Tony Lawson

Author

Listed:
  • Brian O’Boyle

    (National University of Ireland Galway)

  • Terrence McDonough

    (National University of Ireland Galway)

Abstract

This paper challenges Tony Lawson's account of the relationship between mainstream economics and ideology along two key axes. First off, we argue that Newtonian physics has been the primary version of pro-science ideology within mainstream economics, rather than mathematics per se. Secondly, we argue that the particular uses of mathematics within mainstream economics have always been ideological in the pro-capitalist sense of the term. In order to defend these claims we develop a line of argument that Lawson has thus far strategically avoided. Namely, we view mainstream economic theory as an integrated theoretical paradigm with intrinsic links to the capitalist economy. Viewed in this way, it becomes clear that Lawson's (trans) historical account of ideology is too general to capture the complexity of the relationship between natural science, mathematics and mainstream methods. Having briefly outlined Lawson's central argument, we highlight the non-mathematical methods underpinning Classical Political Economy. Thereafter, we assess the nature of the mathematics associated with the Marginal Revolution of the 1870s and the Formalist Revolution of the 1950s.

Suggested Citation

  • Brian O’Boyle & Terrence McDonough, 2017. "Bourgeois Ideology and Mathematical Economics – A Reply to Tony Lawson," Economic Thought, World Economics Association, vol. 6(1), pages 16-34, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:wea:econth:v:6:y:2017:i:1:p:16
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://et.worldeconomicsassociation.org/papers/bourgeois-ideology-and-mathematical-economics-a-reply-to-tony-lawson/
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: http://et.worldeconomicsassociation.org/files/WEA-ET-6-1-OBoyle-McDonough.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Leonidas Montes, 2003. "Smith and Newton: some methodological issues concerning general economic equilibrium theory," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 27(5), pages 723-747, September.
    2. Tony Lawson, 2013. "What is this 'school' called neoclassical economics?," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 37(5), pages 947-983.
    3. John Marangos, 2002. "A Political Economy Approach to the Neoclassical Model of Transition," American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(1), pages 259-276, January.
    4. Blaug, Mark, 2003. "The Formalist Revolution of the 1950s," Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Cambridge University Press, vol. 25(2), pages 145-156, June.
    5. Nuno Ornelas Martins, 2012. "Mathematics, Science and the Cambridge Tradition," Economic Thought, World Economics Association, vol. 1(2), pages 1-2, December.
    6. Chick, Victoria & Dow, Sheila C, 2001. "Formalism, Logic and Reality: A Keynesian Analysis," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 25(6), pages 705-721, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Sandye Gloria-Palermo, 2013. "Equilibrium versus Process: A Confrontation between Mainstream and Austrian Ontology," GREDEG Working Papers 2013-39, Groupe de REcherche en Droit, Economie, Gestion (GREDEG CNRS), Université Côte d'Azur, France.
    2. Mark Setterfield, 2015. "Heterodox economics, social ontology, and the use of mathematics," Working Papers 1503, New School for Social Research, Department of Economics, revised May 2015.
    3. Adem LEVENT, 2016. "Power, Market and Techno-Structure in John Kenneth Galbraith’s Thought," Journal of Social and Administrative Sciences, KSP Journals, vol. 3(2), pages 214-218, June.
    4. Klaus Wälde, 2016. "Emotion Research in Economics," Working Papers 1611, Gutenberg School of Management and Economics, Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz.
    5. Romaniuc, Rustam, 2017. "Intrinsic motivation in economics: A history," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 56-64.
    6. Miguel A. Duran, 2007. "Mathematical Needs and Economic Interpretations," Contributions to Political Economy, Oxford University Press, vol. 26(1), pages 1-16.
    7. Phillips, Daphne, 2009. "The political economy of HIV," Documentos de Proyectos 3703, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL).
    8. Rossi, Enrico, 2020. "Reconsidering the dual nature of property rights: personal property and capital in the law and economics of property rights," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 105840, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    9. Bukvic, Rajko, 2010. "Foundations, Results and Perspectives of Transition: A Case of Serbia," Ekonomika, Journal for Economic Theory and Practice and Social Issues, Society of Economists Ekonomika, Nis, Serbia, vol. 56(4), December.
    10. Najeb Masoud & Glenn Hardaker, 2012. "The impact of financial development on economic growth: Empirical analysis of emerging market countries," Studies in Economics and Finance, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 29(3), pages 148-173, July.
    11. John B. Davis, 2013. "Mark Blaug on the historiography of economics," Chapters, in: Marcel Boumans & Matthias Klaes (ed.), Mark Blaug: Rebel with Many Causes, chapter 12, pages 159-176, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    12. Veneziani, Roberto & Yoshihara, Naoki, 2014. "One million miles to go: taking the axiomatic road to defining exploitation," UMASS Amherst Economics Working Papers 2014-10, University of Massachusetts Amherst, Department of Economics.
    13. Dusek, Tamás, 2012. "A Debreu-féle neowalrasi általános egyensúlyelmélet antiempirista axiomatizmusa [The anti-empirical axiomatism of neo-Walrasian general equilibrium theory]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(9), pages 988-1004.
    14. Ravenscroft, Sue & Williams, Paul F., 2009. "Making imaginary worlds real: The case of expensing employee stock options," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 34(6-7), pages 770-786, August.
    15. Phil Faulkner & Stephen Pratten & Jochen Runde, 2017. "Cambridge Social Ontology: Clarification, Development and Deployment," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 41(5), pages 1265-1277.
    16. Roy J. Rotheim, 2013. "The economist who mistook his model for a market," Chapters, in: Jesper Jespersen & Mogens Ove Madsen (ed.), Teaching Post Keynesian Economics, chapter 2, pages 34-55, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    17. Giuseppe Fontana, 2006. "“Mr Keynes and the ‘Classics’” Again: A Methodological Enquiry," Atlantic Economic Journal, Springer;International Atlantic Economic Society, vol. 34(2), pages 161-174, June.
    18. Alberto ZAZZARO, 2002. "How Heterodox is the Heterodoxy of the Monetary Circuit Theory? The Nature of Money and the Microeconomy of the Circuit," Working Papers 163, Universita' Politecnica delle Marche (I), Dipartimento di Scienze Economiche e Sociali.
    19. Vitaliy Vasilievich Biryukov & Elena Vasilievna Romanenko, 2017. "Economic Behavior of Business Entities, Culture and Institutions: Specifics of their Interrelations in Conditions of Neo-Industrialization," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(4A), pages 370-385.
    20. David Emanuel Andersson, 2021. "Spontaneous Order and the Hayekian Challenge to Interdisciplinary Social Scientists," Atlantic Economic Journal, Springer;International Atlantic Economic Society, vol. 49(4), pages 363-375, December.

    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:wea:econth:v:6:y:2017:i:1:p:16. 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: . General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/worecea.html .

    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 bibliographic 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Jake McMurchie (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/worecea.html .

    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.