IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/uwe/wpaper/0802.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Rhetorical Dualism and the Orthodox/Heterdox Distinction in Economics

Author

Listed:
  • Andrew Mearman

    (School of Economics, University of the West of England, Bristol)

Abstract

This paper attempts to combine elements of the approaches of two influential economists, Sheila Dow and Deirdre McCloskey and expands on previous work (2005) on Dow’s concept of dualism. A concept of rhetorical dualism is developed: dualism (defined variously) engaged in for a rhetorical purpose. It is argued by way of example case studies that rhetorical dualism is a significant feature of economics and that several influential authors have engaged in it. Further rhetorical dualism is shown to be prevalent in the current orthodox/heterodox distinction, and in the arguments of heterodox economists; but also that this distinction and type of distinction are unhelpful.

Suggested Citation

  • Andrew Mearman, 2008. "Rhetorical Dualism and the Orthodox/Heterdox Distinction in Economics," Working Papers 0802, Department of Accounting, Economics and Finance, Bristol Business School, University of the West of England, Bristol.
    • Handle: RePEc:uwe:wpaper:0802
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://carecon.org.uk/DPs/0802.pdf
    File Function: First version, 2008
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dow, Sheila C., 2000. "Prospects for the Progress of Heterodox Economics," Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Cambridge University Press, vol. 22(2), pages 157-170, June.
    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. Andrew Mearman, 2009. "Who do heterodox economists think they are?," Working Papers 0915, Department of Accounting, Economics and Finance, Bristol Business School, University of the West of England, Bristol.

    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. 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.
    2. Andrew Mearman, 2006. "Critical realism in economics and open-systems ontology: A critique," Review of Social Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 64(1), pages 47-75.
    3. Michele Di Maio, 2013. "Are Mainstream and Heterodox Economists Different? An Empirical Analysis," American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 72(5), pages 1315-1348, November.
    4. Karin Astrid Siegmann & Myriam Blin, 2006. "The Best Of Two Worlds: Between-Method Triangulation In Feminist Economics Research," Working Papers 146, Department of Economics, SOAS University of London, UK.
    5. Sandra Silva, 2009. "On evolutionary technological change and economic growth: Lakatos as a starting point for appraisal," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 19(1), pages 111-135, February.
    6. Imko Meyenburg, 2022. "A possibilist justification of the ontology of counterfactuals and forecasted states of economies in economic modelling," Working Papers hal-03751205, HAL.
    7. Dawn Richards Elliott, 2009. "What is the Comparative Advantage of the Service Learning Pedagogy? Insights from Development Economics," Forum for Social Economics, Springer;The Association for Social Economics, vol. 38(2), pages 263-278, July.
    8. Robert Lepenies, 2014. "Economists as political philosophers : a critique of normative trade theory," RSCAS Working Papers 2014/11, European University Institute.
    9. Óscar Carpintero, 2013. "When Heterodoxy Becomes Orthodoxy: Ecological Economics in The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics," American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 72(5), pages 1287-1314, November.
    10. Parada, Jairo, 2008. "Post-Keynesian Theory of Business Enterprise and the Veblenian´s Approach: Are there commonalities?," MPRA Paper 16768, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 10 Jul 2008.
    11. Marco Novarese & Andrea Pozzali, 2010. "Heterodox Economics and the Scientist's Role in Society," American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 69(5), pages 1614-1635, November.
    12. Robert Garnett, 2006. "Paradigms and pluralism in heterodox economics," Review of Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(4), pages 521-546.
    13. 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.
    14. Jairo Parada Corrales, 2008. "Post-keynesian micro theory on business enterprise and the veblenian´s aproach: ¿are there commonalities?," Revista de Economía del Caribe 7106, Universidad del Norte.
    15. Dirk C. Moosmayer & Sandra Waddock & Long Wang & Matthias P. Hühn & Claus Dierksmeier & Christopher Gohl, 2019. "Leaving the Road to Abilene: A Pragmatic Approach to Addressing the Normative Paradox of Responsible Management Education," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 157(4), pages 913-932, July.
    16. Dawn Richards Elliott, 2009. "What is the Comparative Advantage of the Service Learning Pedagogy? Insights from Development Economics," Forum for Social Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 38(2-3), pages 263-278, January.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Rhetoric; dualism; heterodox economics;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • B41 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - Economic Methodology - - - Economic Methodology

    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:uwe:wpaper:0802. 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: Jo Michell (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/seuweuk.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.