IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-03374887.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

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

Author

Listed:
  • Rouven Reinke

    (University of Hamburg)

Abstract

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.

Suggested Citation

  • Rouven Reinke, 2021. "A critical note on the scientific conception of economics: claiming for a methodological pluralism," Post-Print hal-03374887, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-03374887
    DOI: 10.46298/jpe.8664
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.science/hal-03374887v2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hal.science/hal-03374887v2/document
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.46298/jpe.8664?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Arne HEISE, 2020. "Comparing economic theories or: pluralism in economics and the need for a comparative approach to scientific research programmes," The Journal of Philosophical Economics, Bucharest Academy of Economic Studies, The Journal of Philosophical Economics, vol. 13(2), pages 162-184, November.
    2. Brian Loasby, 2003. "Closed models and open systems," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(3), pages 285-306.
    3. David Colander & Richard Holt & Barkley Rosser, 2004. "The changing face of mainstream economics," Review of Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(4), pages 485-499.
    4. Jason Potts, 2000. "The New Evolutionary Microeconomics," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2258.
    5. Arne Heise, 2018. "Reclaiming the University: transforming economics as a discipline," The Journal of Philosophical Economics, Bucharest Academy of Economic Studies, The Journal of Philosophical Economics, vol. 11(2), pages 37-66, May.
    6. Tony Lawson, 2006. "The nature of heterodox economics," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 30(4), pages 483-505, July.
    7. Dow, Sheila, 2002. "Economic Methodology: An Inquiry," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198776123.
    8. Arne Heise, 2014. "The Future of Economics in a Lakatos–Bourdieu Framework," International Journal of Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(3), pages 70-93, July.
    9. Sheila C. Dow, 2012. "Structured Pluralism," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Foundations for New Economic Thinking, chapter 10, pages 162-177, Palgrave Macmillan.
    10. Arne Heise, 2017. "Defining economic pluralism: ethical norm or scientific imperative," International Journal of Pluralism and Economics Education, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 8(1), pages 18-41.
    11. E. Han Kim & Adair Morse & Luigi Zingales, 2006. "What Has Mattered to Economics Since 1970," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 20(4), pages 189-202, Fall.
    12. Dimitris Milonakis, 2012. "Neoclassical economics," Chapters, in: Ben Fine & Alfredo Saad-Filho & Marco Boffo (ed.), The Elgar Companion to Marxist Economics, chapter 39, pages 246-251, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    13. Leonhard Dobusch & Jakob Kapeller, 2009. ""Why is Economics not an Evolutionary Science?" New Answers to Veblen's Old Question," Journal of Economic Issues, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(4), pages 867-898.
    14. Claudius Gräbner & Birte Strunk, 2020. "Pluralism in economics: its critiques and their lessons," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(4), pages 311-329, October.
    15. Hirte, Katrin & Thieme, Sebastian, 2013. "Mainstream, Orthodoxie und Heterodoxie: Zur Klassifizierung der Wirtschaftswissenschaften," ZÖSS-Discussion Papers 38, University of Hamburg, Centre for Economic and Sociological Studies (CESS/ZÖSS).
    16. Schlefer, Jonathan, 2012. "The Assumptions Economists Make," Economics Books, Harvard University Press, number 9780674052260, Spring.
    17. Leonhard Dobusch & Jakob Kapeller, 2012. "Heterodox United vs. Mainstream City? Sketching a Framework for Interested Pluralism in Economics," Journal of Economic Issues, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 46(4), pages 1035-1058.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Laura Porak & Rouven Reinke, 2024. "The contribution of qualitative methods to economic research in an era of polycrisis," Review of Evolutionary Political Economy, Springer, vol. 5(1), pages 31-49, June.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Reinke, Rouven, 2020. "Das Wissenschaftsverständnis der Volkswirtschaftslehre in der Kritik: Implikationen für die Vision einer pluralen Ökonomik," ZÖSS-Discussion Papers 79, University of Hamburg, Centre for Economic and Sociological Studies (CESS/ZÖSS).
    2. Reinke, Rouven, 2021. "Das Verhältnis von neuer Wirtschaftssoziologie und moderner Volkswirtschaftslehre: Möglichkeiten und Grenzen einer soziologischen Kritik am (neoklassischen) Mainstream," ZÖSS-Discussion Papers 83, University of Hamburg, Centre for Economic and Sociological Studies (CESS/ZÖSS).
    3. Laura Porak & Rouven Reinke, 2024. "The contribution of qualitative methods to economic research in an era of polycrisis," Review of Evolutionary Political Economy, Springer, vol. 5(1), pages 31-49, June.
    4. Iazdi, Oz, 2023. "Vieses orto-heterodoxos e os algoritmos economistas do ChatGPT [Ortho-Heterodox biases and the economist algorithms of ChatGPT]," MPRA Paper 117655, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Jakob Kapeller & Stephan Puehringer & Christian Grimm, 2022. "Paradigms and policies: the state of economics in the German-speaking countries," Review of International Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 29(4), pages 1183-1210, July.
    6. Aigner, Ernest, 2021. "Global dynamics and country-level development in academic economics: An explorative cognitive-bibliometric study," SRE-Discussion Papers 07/2021, WU Vienna University of Economics and Business.
    7. William A. Jackson, 2018. "Strategic Pluralism and Monism in Heterodox Economics," Review of Radical Political Economics, Union for Radical Political Economics, vol. 50(2), pages 237-251, June.
    8. Matthias Aistleitner & Jakob Kapeller & Stefan Steinerberger, 2018. "Citation Patterns in Economics and Beyond," Working Papers Series 85, Institute for New Economic Thinking.
    9. Beckenbach, Frank, 2019. "Monism in modern science: The case of (micro-)economics," Working Paper Serie des Instituts für Ökonomie Ök-49, Hochschule für Gesellschaftsgestaltung (HfGG), Institut für Ökonomie.
    10. Heise, Arne, 2019. "Ideology and pluralism: A German view," ZÖSS-Discussion Papers 75, University of Hamburg, Centre for Economic and Sociological Studies (CESS/ZÖSS).
    11. Arne Heise, 2018. "Reclaiming the University: transforming economics as a discipline," The Journal of Philosophical Economics, Bucharest Academy of Economic Studies, The Journal of Philosophical Economics, vol. 11(2), pages 37-66, May.
    12. Arne HEISE, 2016. "‘Why has economics turned out this way?’ A socio-economic note on the explanation of monism in economics," The Journal of Philosophical Economics, Bucharest Academy of Economic Studies, The Journal of Philosophical Economics, vol. 10(1), pages 81-101, November.
    13. Reinke, Rouven, 2021. "Zur ungleichen Verteilung von Macht innerhalb der Volkswirtschaftslehre in Deutschland: Eine feld-und kapitaltheoretische Betrachtung," ZÖSS-Discussion Papers 91, University of Hamburg, Centre for Economic and Sociological Studies (CESS/ZÖSS).
    14. Adriano Codato & Marco Cavalieri & Renato Perissinotto & Eric Gil Dantas, 2016. "Economic mainstream and power: a profile analysis of Central Bank directors during PSDB and PT governments in Brazil [Economic mainstream and power: a profile analysis of Central Bank directors during," Nova Economia, Economics Department, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais (Brazil), vol. 26(3), pages 687-720, September.
    15. Jakob Kapeller & Matthias Aistleitner & Stefan Steinerberger, 2017. "Citation Patterns in Economics and Beyond: Assessing the Peculiarities of Economics from Two Scientometric Perspectives," ICAE Working Papers 60, Johannes Kepler University, Institute for Comprehensive Analysis of the Economy.
    16. Ioana Negru, 2013. "Revisiting the Concept of Schools of Thought in Economics: The Example of the Austrian School," American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 72(4), pages 983-1008, October.
    17. Andrew Mearman, 2010. "What is this thing called ‘heterodox economics’?," Working Papers 1006, Department of Accounting, Economics and Finance, Bristol Business School, University of the West of England, Bristol.
    18. Florentin Gloetzl & Ernest Aigner, 2015. "Pluralism in the Market of Science? A citation network analysis of economic research at universities in Vienna," Ecological Economics Papers ieep5, Institute of Ecological Economics.
    19. Claudius Graebner & Jakob Kapeller, 2015. "The Micro-Macro Link in Heterodox Economics," ICAE Working Papers 37, Johannes Kepler University, Institute for Comprehensive Analysis of the Economy.
    20. Christian Grimm & Jakob Kapeller & Stephan Puehringer, 2017. "Zum Profil der deutschsprachigen Volkswirtschaftslehre: Paradigmatische Ausrichtung und politische Orientierung deutschsprachiger Oekonom_innen (On the current state of German-speaking Economics: Para," ICAE Working Papers 70, Johannes Kepler University, Institute for Comprehensive Analysis of the Economy.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    pluralism; scientific conception; mainstream economics; methodology;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:hal:journl:hal-03374887. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.