This paper analyses the main perceptions of capitalism and crises from a mainstream and heterodox perspective. Broadly defined within the neoclassical structure, the mainstream approaches support the idea of long-term stability of capitalism and describe crises as exogenous events. The heterodox perceptions, on the contrary, perceive crises as an internal feature of capitalism and propose to reframe the global economy within the limits of the socio-environmental systems. Despite the historical recurrence of crises, the neoclassic capitalist framework and the related mainstream (...) perceptions are still dominating the international economic debate. Most of the crises have then been addressed with reforms oriented to adjust some elements of the system without changing the overall economic structure. On the contrary, limited numbers of initiatives have been implemented to reorganise the economy according to the heterodox perspectives. Within this context, further analysis would be needed to investigate the feasibility of the proposed heterodox solutions. By discussing the main perceptions of capitalism and crises and by considering the ethical implications of the mainstream and the heterodox approaches, the present paper contributes to the existing debate around stability of capitalism and provides a starting point for analysis oriented to investigate the feasibility of alternative economic structures. (shrink)

Within the heterodox economic literature on pluralism, attention has predominately focussed on epistemic and methodological levels. The response to the question of what ontological pluralism could mean, and its contribution to the debate, remains limited. This paper argues for greater attention to be given to ontological pluralism, not only because it enriches the existing discussions around pluralism in the heterodox literature but it also provides support for a plurality of epistemological standards and methodological approaches. The paper proposes an alternative definition (...) of ontological pluralism based on the work of McDaniel and Turner. Both argue that ontological pluralism should be understood as saying that there are different ways to exist and that acceptance of the semantic characteristics of ontological questions and statements within different ontological discourses are essential in a proper definition. This paper details their definition and explores its consequences with an analysis of the Searle–Lawson dispute on social objects. (shrink)

Drawing on the knowledge of highly experienced academics, this authoritative Handbook explains how ethics can inform the teaching of economics. It includes state-of-the-art moral theory alongside traditional approaches to emphasise why ethics should be an important consideration for economic practitioners. The Handbook of Teaching Ethics to Economists keenly demonstrates how economic analysis can reflect implicit moral judgements. Chapters include guidance on course design and lesson content, providing insight into important topics such as ecological and grassroots economics. They offer pedagogical advice (...) alongside philosophical analyses, setting out teaching guidance and significant case-study profiles on key theories, such as Kantian and Aristotelian ethics. Importantly, they reflect on the potential of economics to cause harm and use ethics to mitigate this possibility. This expansive Handbook will be essential for academics preparing to teach courses relating to ethics and economics. Due to its detailed explanations of the societal role of economics, students of economics and finance will additionally find this Handbook to be incredibly useful. (shrink)