Abstract
Does the mainstream of economic thinking and analysis tend systematically to exclude ideas and approaches that could enrich the field, and, as a consequence, have important questions and issues been shunted aside for nonobjective reasons? Two recent volumes by heterodox economists that address these questions are Geoffrey Hodgson's How Economics Forgot History: The Problem of Historical Specificity in Social Science, and Steve Keen's Debunking Economics: The Naked Emperor of the Social Sciences. I evaluate their claims of academic exclusion and assess the current state of (selective) pluralism within mainstream economics.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 1079-1095 |
| Number of pages | 17 |
| Journal | European Journal of Political Economy |
| Volume | 20 |
| Issue number | 4 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - Nov 2004 |
Keywords
- Academic exclusion
- Economics education
- Heterodoxy
- Historical specificity
- Pluralism
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Mainstream economics, heterodoxy and academic exclusion: A review essay'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver