David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Politics, Philosophy and Economics 3 (1):59-76 (2004)
For most observers of economics from both inside and outside the science, the term economics is synonymous with neoclassical economics. It is the methodology of neoclassical economics that defines the discipline of economics. Mainstream economics is neoclassical economics and anyone entering the discipline today who wishes to obtain an appointment at one of the leading universities of the world is well advised to master its techniques. The fact that virtually every winner of a Nobel prize from Paul Samuelson up to his student Joseph Stiglitz has been a practitioner of neoclassical economics is ample proof of the methodologys triumph. Despite the dominance of this methodology, however, neoclassical economics has been subject to a steady stream of criticisms and proposals for alternative methodological approaches throughout its life. This article focuses on two relatively recent challenges to the neoclassical orthodoxy that seem to have taken hold of a non-negligible minority of the profession, some of whom can be found at leading universities. These two challenges come from behavioural economics and evolutionary economics. The article describes the strengths and weaknesses of both of these methodological approaches and contrasts them with that of neoclassical economics. It concludes that all three methodologies have something positive to contribute to the study of human behaviour. Key Words: neoclassical economics behavioural economics evolutionary economics.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library||
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Bruno S. Frey, Silke Humbert & Friedrich Schneider (2010). What is Economics? Attitudes and Views of German Economists. Journal of Economic Methodology 17 (3):317-332.
J. (2007). Authority and Democracy in Corporate Governance? Journal of Business Ethics 71 (4):359-370.
Pursey P. M. A. R. Heugens, J. Oosterhout & Muel Kaptein (2006). Foundations and Applications for Contractualist Business Ethics. Journal of Business Ethics 68 (3):211-228.
Pursey P. M. A. R. Heugens, J. Oosterhout & Muel Kaptein (2006). Foundations and Applications for Contractualist Business Ethics. Journal of Business Ethics 68 (3):211 - 228.
Similar books and articles
Robert Wutscher, Robert P. Murphy & Walter E. Block (2010). Mathematics in Economics: An Austrian Methodological Critique. Philosophical Investigations 33 (1):44-66.
Milan Zafirovski (2000). The Rational Choice Generalization of Neoclassical Economics Reconsidered: Any Theoretical Legitimation for Economic Imperialism? Sociological Theory 18 (3):448-471.
Wolfram Latsch (2003). Androids and Agents: Do We Need a Non‐Computational Economics? Journal of Economic Methodology 10 (3):375-396.
John M. Gowdy & Peg Olsen (1994). Further Problems with Neoclassical Environmental Economics. Environmental Ethics 16 (2):161-171.
Michael Moehler & Geoffrey Brennan (2010). Neoclassical Economics. In Mark Bevir (ed.), Encyclopedia of Political Theory. SAGE Publications.
Paul Davidson (1989). The Economics of Ignorance or Ignorance of Economics? Critical Review 3 (3-4):467-487.
Stephan Boehm & Karl Farmer (1993). Why the Acrimony? Reply to Davidson. Critical Review 7 (2-3):407-421.
Lawrence A. Boland (1998). Situational Analysis Beyond Neoclassical Economists. Philosophy of the Social Sciences 28 (4):515-521.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads30 ( #49,102 of 1,089,099 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #69,982 of 1,089,099 )
How can I increase my downloads?