Scientific schools and directions of economic theory on the modern era of development

The modern expansion of subject areas of application in the development of economic theory, scientists, as a rule, distinguish four large eras of development, which are equal in their level of influence on the development of economic knowledge.

Introduction to Part II

This Introduction indicates the aim of the two chapters that follow: to illustrate how parliamentary debate provided political economy with its topics of discussion and forms of argument. The particular case studies are the Bullion Controversy and the Corn Laws debate. The first controversy concerned the role of the Bank of England in raising prices through an excessive note issue, and this question came to be examined by writers such as Malthus and Ricardo at an abstract level. But this style of argument was rejected as inappropriate for guiding the deliberations of Parliament in 1810–1811. In relation to the second case, the Corn Laws, c. 1813–1815, the question of whether or not the trade in corn should be free was treated in Parliament as a question requiring casuistical adjudication, a style of argument that Malthus and Ricardo were evidently obliged to adopt, along with other participants. Both topics have traditionally been studied as key moments in the development of economic theory, yet the account developed here suggests that we have typically misread the texts by placing them in unhistorical contexts.

The Mythology of the «Keynesian Crisis» or Where Is Keynes Calling Russia?

The article analyzes and criticizes a vicious practice of the economists who attribute the ideas to the eminent economists who didn’t elaborate those ideas.The practice existed in the 19th and 20th centuries. It does exist today. It has done a huge damage to the development of economic theory and certain and specific economic sciences. Especially in the last century Keynesianism was at the receiving end since it clearly defined the watershed between the obsolete but die-hard «laissez-faire» economic theory – «invisible hand of the market»,free competition and government management of the economy.In this regard the economic theory constantly faces the question of certain «Keynesianism crisis», allegedly indicative of obsolescence of Keynesianism as economic theory.The article on the contrary proves that «Keynesianism crisis» is far-fetched and of ideological nature. Keynesianism itself is relevant today, more than ever, especially in the conditions of Russia, where, according to invincible belief of the author,state-directed market economy named state capitalism is being formed slowly and surely.

Trends in the development of economic theory and economic science

Economic theory today is characterized by high development, current changes that contain the main attitudes, technologies, firms — their economic interests, general psychological actions on government steps of influence.

ANALYSIS OF J. KEYNES'S CONTRIBUTION IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF ECONOMIC THEORY

The article describes the educational and scientific university environment in which Keynes's talent was formed, as well as the Bloomsbury Circle of Intellectuals, in which Keynes occupied a prominent place. The formation of Keynes's specific approach to economic problems, which combine the analysis of real problems, theory and formulation of the practical proposals, is considered on the example of the early work of Keynes in the 1910s. The article argues that Keynesianism is the real engine of the modern economy. Keynes developed methods and apparatus by which the conceptual vision of economics is transformed into concrete representations of the economic theory. After a long journey, shown in his works ("General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money"), Keynes developed his vision of economic and social phenomena as an analytically functional analysis, and finally destroyed the logical capacity of people's faith in the ability of a free market economy to automatically maintain full employment, identified the possibility of influencing the regulation of money circulation on prices, exports, imports, production process and employment. Despite criticism of his theoretical evidence, even his opponents agreed that Keynes's ideas had been confirmed in practice. At the end of the article are the assessments of Keynes' research by authors and scientists with different views.

The common sense of economics and divergent approaches in economic thought: a view from Risk, Uncertainty, and Profit

This paper evaluates the contribution of Risk, Uncertainty, and Profit to the development of economic theory in the 20th century. Our argument in this paper is twofold. First, we contend that this book embodied what had been the common knowledge of early neoclassical economics prior to World War II (WWII). Second, we also argue that embryonic to Knight's account of economics were two divergent approaches to economic thought that emerged after WWII. The first approach, what has come to be known as microeconomics, is characterized by utility maximization under fixed price, income, and institutional parameters that approximate equilibrium. This first approach is distinct from a second approach, referred to as price theory, in which prices are not sufficient statistics, as in microeconomics, but operate as guides to consumption and production decisions under alternative institutional arrangements. This second approach not only represented the continuation of the mainline1 of economic thought from its classical and early neoclassical roots. It also embodies the basis for Knight's understanding of uncertainty, profit and entrepreneurship, as well as its implications for economic organization and social progress.

How Many Paradigms There are in Economic Theory – and Can it Become a One-paradigm Science

Over the past 100 years, economics has stood out from other scientific disciplines because of the presence of two fundamentally different approaches to understanding its subject: from a systemic point of view, and from the point of view of individual choice. All the main directions of modern economic theory turn out to be reducible to two paradigms, conceptually related to two main interpretations of the economic science subject. The understanding of the economy as an equilibrium or non-equilibrium system is associated with two said paradigms. The author believes that the development of economic theory after Keynes can be interpreted as a series of attempts to integrate the identified paradigms. In another form, this is the question of the synthesis of micro- and macro-approaches in economic theory.

Potyczki metodologiczne Gunnara Myrdala

Purpose – The aim of this paper is to show the methodological approach in the works of Gunnar Myrdal, with particular emphasis on the publication of The Political Element in the Development of Economic Theory [Myrdal, 2017] – a leading theoretical and methodological work, as well as including the main methodological divisions in economics and the evolution of the Myrdal`s concept in the analysed substantive scope. Research method – In the article uses the descriptive and comparative analyses were used. Results – Myrdal reinforced the arguments of heterodox economists in the context of the symbolic `fight for recognition` of the methodology of mainstream critics. He developed a pragmatic element of economics, which in turn influences the style of teaching economics and conducting scientific research at world universities.

F. Von Hayek: Invention of the Enemy and Modern Neoliberalism

The paper considers the evolution of the category “political” in the development of economic theory of the XVIII – XX centuries. It demonstrates the departure of economic science from ideological assessments characteristic for the antagonistic relations of early capitalism. In the 1940s – 1950s F. von Hayek reintroduces the concept of “enemy” into economic researches, which is met with strong rejection by the Western establishment, which is under the influence of Keynesianism. F. von Hayek is one of the founders of neoliberalism, within the framework of which an antagonistic confrontation between the “blind forces of the market” and the “dictatorship of a group of people” is being constructed. Thus, a dilemma is imposed, which does not provide an opportunity to understand the mechanisms of market design. Von Hayek is making great efforts to create a transatlantic network of neoliberal organizations based on the Mont Pelerin Society. Long work leads to the fact that in the 1970s. neoliberalism is becoming the ideology - hegemon. At present, the political category retains its significance in economic science. Ideological constructs such as human capital, private money, diffused knowledge, despite their utopianism, continue to transform reality