IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/rherxx/v82y2022i1p55-76.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Economics: A Fragmented and Troubled Scientific Discipline? A Review of Alessandro Roncaglia’s The Age of Fragmentation: A History of Contemporary Economic Thought (2019)

Author

Listed:
  • Matthew Smith

Abstract

This paper provides a detailed review of Alessandro Roncaglia’s book, The Age of Fragmentation: A History of Contemporary Thought, published in 2019. It is shown by Roncaglia in this book that since early in the twentieth century economic thought has fragmented into many different research fields, and into many different theoretical approaches, and yet the mainstream of contemporary economics has become progressively dominated by the marginalist approach. The review accounts for the main themes in Roncaglia’s interpretation of the development of contemporary economic thought in its many different fields and theoretical perspectives and his evaluation of their scientific contribution. A central argument of Roncaglia is that because of the fragmented nature of economics and the cultural-political factors shaping research funding of it, the history of economic thought has never been more important for communication and mutual comprehension across the discipline to ensure its intellectual health and ethical standing.

Suggested Citation

  • Matthew Smith, 2022. "Economics: A Fragmented and Troubled Scientific Discipline? A Review of Alessandro Roncaglia’s The Age of Fragmentation: A History of Contemporary Economic Thought (2019)," History of Economics Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 82(1), pages 55-76, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:rherxx:v:82:y:2022:i:1:p:55-76
    DOI: 10.1080/10370196.2022.2079195
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/10370196.2022.2079195
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/10370196.2022.2079195?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

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

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:taf:rherxx:v:82:y:2022:i:1:p:55-76. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/rher .

    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.