scholarly journals A critical note on the scientific conception of economics: claiming for a methodological pluralism

2021 ◽  
Vol Volume XIV Issue 1-2 (Articles) ◽  
Author(s):  
Rouven Reinke

Opponents of mainstream economics have not yet called attention to the lack of in-depth examination of the general scientific conception of modern economics. However, economic science cannot consistently fulfil the epistemological and ontological requirements of the scientific standards underlying this conception. What can be scientifically recognized as true cannot be answered, neither through the actual ontological structure of the object of observation nor through a methodological demarcation. These limitations necessarily lead to the claim for both a pragmatic and a radical methodological pluralism.

2004 ◽  
pp. 107-117 ◽  
Author(s):  
V. Tarasevich

The general scientific context of evolution of fundamental economic science is considered in the article. Possible changes of the status of economics as one of the universum spheres, shifts in fundamental economic science, its subject, object, subject space and methodical toolkit in connection with priority development of a post-nonclassical paradigm of scientific thought are analyzed.


2008 ◽  
pp. 120-130 ◽  
Author(s):  
N. Shapiro

The article shows the methodological ambiguity of Keynes’ ideas. The simplified treatment of his views on the part of his followers is criticized. The author shows the difference between Keynes’ methodological disputes with classics and his debate with mathematical economists and econometricians, in particular with J. Tinbergen. It is shown that methodological discussions of 1930-1940 are actual for the assessment of the current state of economic science in Russia.


2019 ◽  
Vol 51 (4) ◽  
pp. 562-571
Author(s):  
Tim Koechlin

This paper is about the gaping silence in mainstream economics regarding the relationship among capitalism, race, racism, and enduring racial inequality in the USA. Racial inequality is a glaring and enduring fact about the US economy. And yet mainstream economics has little to say about race or racism. Gregory Mankiw’s bestselling textbook devotes seven pages to “discrimination.” There is no discussion of racism per se. Mainstream economists and textbooks typically conflate racism and “discrimination,” and reassure the reader that “markets contain a natural remedy for employer discrimination” (Mankiw, 2008: 409). A student is likely to leave ECON 101 (or an economics major) with a sense that “economic science” has “shown” that discrimination is not that big a deal, and that the history of racist plunder and exploitation in the USA (of which there likely has been no discussion) is not relevant to “economics.” I argue here that the mainstream narrative (its assumptions, its logic, its conclusions, and its rhetorical choices and emphases) systematically obscures, dismisses, and ignores essential ways that racial inequality has been (re)produced by US capitalism. Especially striking is the resounding silence about the legacy of racist economic practices—in particular, the ways in which the enormous black/white wealth gap (and its effects) in the USA are linked to centuries of racist exclusion, violence, and plunder. The mainstream narrative thus whitewashes capitalism and exonerates “the market system.” The final section argues for a radical multidisciplinary economics. JEL classification: J15, D63


2015 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 277-303 ◽  
Author(s):  
AGNÈS LABROUSSE

AbstractThis contribution aims at an original comparison of development analysis with Elinor Ostrom and Esther Duflo from a methodological standpoint, scrutinising their relationship to theory and their operative research strategies. Both perspectives are investigated as case studies for a broader discussion about significant trends in economics and social sciences. Duflo and the J-PAL's approach illustrates – in its own way – new trends and some blind alleys in contemporary forms of mainstream economics, whereas Ostrom and the Bloomington school point towards the marked theoretical and methodological reflexivity of institutionalism, its sensitivity to historical diversity and openness towards social sciences. Distinct social philosophies and episteme are at stake displaying a great divide between two brands of realism and pragmatism, two relationships to development, expertise and knowledge. The paper also contrasts Duflo's methodological monism and mechanistic piecemeal analysis with Ostrom's methodological pluralism and adaptive complex systems analysis.


2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 145
Author(s):  
Nurul Hilmiyah ◽  
Bayu Taufiq Possumah ◽  
Muhammad Hakimi Mohd Shafiai

Purposes: In the social sciences, economics is one of the most influential and prestigious disciplines. Mainstream economics typically view economic agent as amoral, entirely self-interested, unrealistic and has damaging effects. In the last few decades, while remaining a powerful discipline, economics has narrowed in scope. Consequently, to reinvigorate economics, especially in times of crisis or major institutional change, mainstream economics has almost lost a key reserve of alternative thinking. This study intends to investigate the contemporary mainstream economic system, does Islamic Economics taking advantage of the shortfall of the system outlined above based on Tawhidical approach?Design/Methodology/Approach: This paper using the descriptive qualitative method Findings: Modern economics is normative bias; does not explain actual economies but describes a "utopia" in which Pareto optimality applies. The excessive unrealistic assumption is the impact of the inconsistency of modern economic theory. The important aspects of human behavior ignored by this assumption as the theory of economic man. In addition, the general equilibrium theory of neoclassical is not compatible with an economy that develops over time. It relies too much on complex mathematical models without sufficient attention to whether this really illustrates the real economy and ignores the complexity of nature and human creativity. At the contrary, Islam cause to be present the Tawhidic based economics approaches can be focused towards seeing wholes of economics, rather than parts; seeing economics activities as worship, rather than competition; cultivating the solidarity (charity), rather than individualism and creating the justice, rather than injustice. Thus this paper designed to provide the concept of Islamic economic system with Tawhid as the basis, to fit the philosophy of economic science and reality of human life. The paper shows the position of Tawhid in the system and theory of economy.  It becomes a must to do to create prosperity and benefit for all mankind, with the aim to realign and comparing to the mainstream economic system and their theory.Originality/Value: This paper proposes the position of Tawhidic based economics approach in setting the economic system. The position of this foundation offers basic guidelines for the justice and fairly system, which is benefited to all human beings regardless of religions, races, and castes, and furthermore to the sustainable economic development and welfare for the ummah.


2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Tatyana Ogorodnikova ◽  
Aleksei Solomein ◽  
Irina Shipunova

The article described the specifics of economic science in the context of general scientific principles of cognition and the need to ensure the stability of economic systems. The research examined the nature and essence of objective and subjective factors of economic behavior, the nature of their interaction and the mechanism of transformation. Objective economic laws of differentiation of economic entities by the level of absolute welfare and equality of relative welfare are formulated. The state of the economic system is considered from the position of thermodynamic equilibrium. We formulated the condition of thermodynamic equilibrium of economic systems, which differs from the condition of equilibrium in the light of mechanistic concepts. The moment of the first archaic division of labor was highlighted as the point of bifurcation and the exit of the economic system from the state of thermodynamic equilibrium. The irreversible nature of this transition was emphasized. We found that it is necessary to study economic systems as non-equilibrium from the standpoint of assessing the state of complex dynamic structural formations.


2008 ◽  
pp. 20-43 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Khudokormov

The author considers modern economic theory from the point of view of crisis phenomena inherent to it. He recapitulates various aspects and positions of different authors and concludes that there is obvious presence of crisis tendencies in different fields of economic research. Nevertheless it is not worth talking about the crisis as there is no real alternative to neoclassical mainstream economics. Basing upon the detailed analysis of the state of modern economic science the article classifies its major schools and currents putting emphasis on the philosophical, political and ideological orientation of their main representatives.


2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (7) ◽  
Author(s):  
K.K. Kumekhov ◽  
N. G. Danilochkina ◽  
V. I. Flegantov ◽  
N. V. Cherner

The crisis of the economic science may be explained largely by several paradoxes making logical premises uncertain.  Based upon the “methodological pluralism”, they do not explain many fundamental matters making classification and accumulation of knowledge impossible. Our study aims to reveal (analysing modern economic theories by modelling) the main reasons of this state of the economic science, explain them scientifically and suggest the ways to eliminate them.  By monographic studies, comparison and modelling, we have formulated the content of the scientific approach, its elements and their hierarchy.  We have revealed the ways to implement scientific research and substantiated the need for economic modelling based upon identified criteria, and to build governmental economic policies on scientific grounds. Our conclusions and suggested measures are singular in respect of their content.  They enable  to evaluate objectively-based methodic grounds of the economic science anew.  We believe, that the article would be of interest to a wide circle of researches dealing in methodology and economic modelling


Author(s):  
Dmitrij Egorov

In the article a critical interpretation of the processes taking place in recent decades in the methodology of the mainstream economics is given. It is hypothesized that the observed devaluation of the concept of "truth", tolerance to the contradictions of particular theories, etc. is a form of protection of mainstream economic theory hard core (and, through this - the ideological protection of the entire world financial and economic architecture). It is concluded that the way out of the theoretical crisis of economic theory is not in the erosion of the millennial scientific standards, but in the return to them.


2007 ◽  
pp. 35-54 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Libman

The paper presents a survey of the main fields of theoretical and empirical research in economics and social sciences. It offers two classifications of economic research based on methodology and segments of scientific community. Advantages and disadvantages of different methodological approaches and standards of communication are considered. The article also discusses the main directions of evolution of mainstream economics, as well as empirical and experimental turn in the modern economic science.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document