IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/uta/papers/2009_11.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Conversation or Monologue? On Advising Heterodox Economists

Author

Listed:
  • Matías Vernengo

Abstract

This paper suggests that heterodox economists should not think of themselves as economists first, and only secondarily as heterodox, and must emphasize methodological issues, in particular the different assumptions (or axioms) implicit in their theories vis-à-vis the mainstream. The paper argues that the notion of a cutting edge of the mainstream, which is breaking up with orthodoxy, is misleading. The role of the cutting edge is to allow the mainstream to sound reasonable when talking about reality, while orthodoxy provides authority to the cutting edge. The cutting edge is essential for the mainstream and remains firmly based on orthodox grounds.

Suggested Citation

  • Matías Vernengo, 2009. "Conversation or Monologue? On Advising Heterodox Economists," Working Paper Series, Department of Economics, University of Utah 2009_11, University of Utah, Department of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:uta:papers:2009_11
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://economics.utah.edu/research/publications/2009_11.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. McCloskey, Donald N, 1983. "The Rhetoric of Economics," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 21(2), pages 481-517, June.
    2. 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.
    3. Tony Lawson, 1994. "The Nature of Post Keynesianism and Its Links to Other Traditions: A Realist Perspective," Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(4), pages 503-538, July.
    4. David Dequech, 2007. "Neoclassical, mainstream, orthodox, and heterodox economics," Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(2), pages 279-302.
    5. Tony Lawson, 1994. "The Nature of Post Keynesianism and Its Links to Other Traditions," Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(1), pages 164-164, September.
    6. Dani Rodrik, 1998. "Has Globalization Gone Too Far?," Challenge, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 41(2), pages 81-94, March.
    7. Paul Davidson, 2005. "Responses to Lavoie, King, and Dow on what Post Keynesianism is and who is a Post Keynesian," Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(3), pages 393-408.
    8. Paul Davidson, 1996. "Reality and Economic Theory," Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(4), pages 479-508, July.
    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. 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.
    2. Lavoie, Marc, 2015. "¿Debería la economía heterodoxa ser enseñada en departamentos de economía, o existe algún espacio para la economía backwater?," Estudios Nueva Economía, Estudios Nueva Economía, vol. 5(2), pages 4-16.
    3. Senderski, Marcin, 2014. "Ecumenical foundations? On the coexistence of Austrian and neoclassical views on utility," MPRA Paper 67024, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Kosta Josifidis & Novica Supic, 2020. "Innovation and Income Inequality in the USA: Ceremonial versus Institutional Changes," Journal of Economic Issues, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 54(2), pages 486-494, April.

    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. James P. Gander, 2009. "Firm Debt Structure and Firm Size," Working Paper Series, Department of Economics, University of Utah 2009_09, University of Utah, Department of Economics.
    2. Adem LEVENT, 2016. "Power, Market and Techno-Structure in John Kenneth Galbraith’s Thought," Journal of Social and Administrative Sciences, KSP Journals, vol. 3(2), pages 214-218, June.
    3. Finn Olesen, 2010. "Uncertainty, bounded rationality and post-Keynesian Macroeconomics," European Journal of Economics and Economic Policies: Intervention, Edward Elgar Publishing, vol. 7(1), pages 109-124.
    4. Paul Downward & Frederick Lee, "undated". "Post Keynesian Pricing Theory `Reconfirmed'(?) A Critical Review of `Asking About Prices'," Working Papers 98-13, Staffordshire University, Business School.
    5. Eduardo Fernández-Huerga & Ana Pardo & Ana Salvador, 2023. "Compatibility and complementarity between institutional and post-Keynesian economics: a literature review with a particular focus on methodology," Economia Politica: Journal of Analytical and Institutional Economics, Springer;Fondazione Edison, vol. 40(2), pages 413-443, July.
    6. Fontana, Giuseppe & Gerrard, Bill, 2004. "A Post Keynesian theory of decision making under uncertainty," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 25(5), pages 619-637, October.
    7. David Colander & Richard Holt & J. Rosser, 2007. "Live and dead issues in the methodology of economics," Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(2), pages 303-312.
    8. Siobhan Austen & Therese Jefferson, 2006. "Comparing responses to critical realism," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(2), pages 257-282.
    9. Paul Downward, "undated". "Risk, Uncertainty and Inference in Post Keynesian Economics:A Realist Commentary," Working Papers 98-8, Staffordshire University, Business School.
    10. repec:pra:mprapa:39569 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Giuseppe Fontana & Bill Gerrard, 2006. "The future of Post Keynesian economics," BNL Quarterly Review, Banca Nazionale del Lavoro, vol. 59(236), pages 49-80.
    12. Geoffrey Harcourt & Peter Kriesler, 2012. "Introduction [to Handbook of Post-Keynesian Economics: Oxford University Press: USA]," Discussion Papers 2012-33, School of Economics, The University of New South Wales.
    13. Finn Olesen, 2007. "Kritisk realisme og post keynesianisme," Working Papers 75/07, University of Southern Denmark, Department of Sociology, Environmental and Business Economics.
    14. Pessali, Huascar & Berger, Bruno, 2010. "A teoria da perspectiva e as mudanças de preferência no mainstream: um prospecto lakatoseano [Prospect theory and preference change in the mainstream of economics: a Lakatosian prospect]," MPRA Paper 26104, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    15. Ambrosino, Angela & Fontana, Magda & Gigante, Anna Azzurra, 2015. "Shifting Boundaries in Economics: the Institutional Cognitive Strand," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis. Working Papers 201544, University of Turin.
    16. Barbara Dluhosch, 2011. "European Economics at a Crossroads, by J. Barkley Rosser, Jr., Richard P. F. Holt, and David Colander," Journal of Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51(3), pages 629-631, August.
    17. Scrieciu, S. Şerban & Barker, Terry & Ackerman, Frank, 2013. "Pushing the boundaries of climate economics: critical issues to consider in climate policy analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 155-165.
    18. Amitava Krishna Dutt, 2015. "Uncertainty, power, institutions, and crisis: implications for economic analysis and the future of capitalism," Review of Keynesian Economics, Edward Elgar Publishing, vol. 3(1), pages 9-28, January.
    19. Remig, Moritz C., 2017. "Structured pluralism in ecological economics — A reply to Peter Söderbaum's commentary," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 533-537.
    20. 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.
    21. Annina Kaltenbrunner, 2018. "Financialised internationalisation and structural hierarchies: a mixed-method study of exchange rate determination in emerging economies," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 42(5), pages 1315-1341.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Methodology; Heterodox Economics;

    JEL classification:

    • B41 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - Economic Methodology - - - Economic Methodology
    • B59 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - Current Heterodox Approaches - - - Other

    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:uta:papers:2009_11. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/deuutus.html .

    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.