Furthering Pluralism: Economics, Anthropology, and Social Norms

In mainstream economics, the plurality and coexistence of theoretical paradigms within the discipline are rejected, as is methodological pluralism, with mathematical formalisation serving as an inescapable criterion. When mainstream economics engages with other conceptual frameworks or concepts from the social sciences, it primarily does so by absorbing them. Moreover, since the end of the 20th century, it has claimed that ‘a-theoretical' and applied stances allow for greater scientificity. Heterodox economics, for its part, struggles to define and distinguish itself from mainstream economics, due, among other reasons, to the heterogeneity of its various currents. A commonality, however, is the assertion that it is more pluralist than the mainstream. In this context, heterodox economics' claims that its conceptual paradigms are more rigorous and better suited to reality than those of mainstream economics are weakened by aporias once the dimension of pluralism is considered: non-mainstream theoretical assumptions must remain identifiable as belonging to the framework that mainstream economics defines as ‘economics'; but if non-mainstream research departs from mainstream premises and mathematical methodology, mainstream economics no longer recognises it as part of the discipline. It is argued that non-mainstream approaches can bypass this dilemma by deepening a pluralist epistemology, particularly by harnessing concepts from other social sciences in ways that reinforce these approaches - since, in fact, the latter sometimes explore these concepts no more than mainstream economics does. Anthropology is taken as an example of a social science that can contribute to pluralism, illustrated through the concepts of social norms and culture.