Revisiting The Death of Economics
Paul Ormerod achieved notoriety, even opprobrium among orthodox economists, with the publication in 1994 of his best-selling book The Death of Economics. Ormerodâ€™s aim was to provide a critique of conventional economics which was accessible to general readers. He described orthodox economicsâ€”with its assumptions of â€˜rationalâ€™ behaviour in a mechanical, linear world of equilibriumâ€” as in many ways an empty box. â€œIts understanding of the world is similar to that of the physical sciences in the Middle Ages. A few insights have been obtained which will stand the test of time, but they are very few indeed, and the whole basis of conventional economics is deeply flawed.â€ No wonder the prescriptions offered by conventional economists regarding big questions like inflation and unemployment are, according to Ormerod, at best misleading and at worst dangerously wrong. A secondary objective of the book was to suggest how economics could be developed to give a better understanding of how the world actually operates. A necessary starting point is a wider appreciation of human society as a non-linear system of huge complexity. Here, the approaches of the biological sciencesâ€”or of subjects such as palaeontology, astronomy and climatology which tend to build theories around the facts from the outset rather than pursuing abstract theories of how a rational world ought to operateâ€”are likely to reveal more light than can the restrictive analytical tools of economic orthodoxy. World Economics asked the author whether, eight years on, he still stood by his original theses, or whether he has had cause to revise his ideas. In this invited article, Paul Ormerod revisits â€˜the death of economicsâ€™.
Volume (Year): 2 (2001)
Issue (Month): 2 (April)
|Contact details of provider:|| |
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wej:wldecn:60. 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: (Ed Jones)
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.