IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/cambje/v45y2021i4p631-654..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The unity of science and the disunity of economics

Author

Listed:
  • Angela Ambrosino
  • Mario Cedrini
  • John B Davis

Abstract

In the article, we propose a general theoretical framework to distinguish a set of possible options for integration between social sciences. Adopting the so-called ‘nation’ metaphor in order to investigate relationships between disciplines, the framework uses an analogy with Dani Rodrik’s ‘world political trilemma’ (whereby democracy—here self-determination of science—national sovereignty—here disciplines—and global economic integration—here disciplinary integration—are mutually incompatible) to distinguish three different roads to the realisation of the unity of social science (‘reductionism’, ‘integration’ and ‘complexity’). The framework is then applied to recent proposals for unifying the social sciences that have originated within the economics profession at a time of pervasive specialisation and increasing fragmentation. While discussing the origins, the feasibility and the desirability of disciplinary integration projects, we concentrate on the issue of pluralism in both social sciences and within economics and on the ‘structural’ conditions that would permit economics to participate in the development of a transdisciplinary behavioural science.

Suggested Citation

  • Angela Ambrosino & Mario Cedrini & John B Davis, 2021. "The unity of science and the disunity of economics," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 45(4), pages 631-654.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:cambje:v:45:y:2021:i:4:p:631-654.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/cje/beab014
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ananyin, O., 2024. "Economic science: The challenge of fragmentation," Journal of the New Economic Association, New Economic Association, vol. 63(2), pages 193-210.
    2. Ambrosino, Angela & Cedrini, Mario & B. Davis, John, 2022. "Today’s economics: One, No One and One Hundred Thousand," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis. Working Papers 202215, University of Turin.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:cambje:v:45:y:2021:i:4:p:631-654.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/cje .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.