Pluralism in economic science or a transitory state toward a new post-neoclassical mainstream?

DOI: https://doi.org/10.51919/revista_sh.v1i0.28
Keywords: Methodology, Orthodoxy, Pulralism

Abstract

The article initially intends to expose a methodological reflection on the unsuccessful attempt of economic science to find a unique method to constitute its theories. We then address an attempt by the same science to find better explanations for the phenomena it faces. Therefore, the state of the art of mainstream pluralism was seen as an enterprise seeking to give dynamism to the economist's profession and somehow counteract the label of a monism in the area. Finally, it concludes with some observations about a certain eclecticism within the most current approaches, where the great doubt, expressed in the title of this work, remains sub judice.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Marcelo de Carvalho Azevedo Anache, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro

Doctor in History of Sciences and Techniques and Epistemology (HCTE-UFRJ). Master in Economic Theory (UFES). Graduated in Economic Sciences (FCE-UERJ) Adjunct Professor at the Faculty of Accounting Sciences and Business Administration and Coordinator of the Post-Graduate Course in Corporate Management at the Souza Marques Technical-Educational Foundation (FTESM).

Carlos Benevenuto Guisard Koehler, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro

Graduated in Metallurgical Engineering and Materials Science from the Pontifical Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro (1977), Master in Energy Planning from the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro (1986) and Doctor in Production Engineering from the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro (1995 ). Professor of the Graduate Program in History of Sciences and Techniques and Epistemology (HCTE) at the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ). Leader of the Study Group on Theories of Ether and Structure of Matter. Works mainly in the areas of History of Science, Epistemology, Causality and Determinism, History of Physics and Structure of Matter and Epistemological Issues in Theory of Dynamic Systems.

Luiz da Costa Laurencel, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro

Graduated in Electrical Engineering (Electronics) from the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro (1974), Master in Transport Engineering from the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro (1986), Doctorate in Production Engineering from the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro (2000) and post-doctorate in History of Sciences and Techniques and epistemology (2018). Associate professor at Universidade Federal Fluminense and State University of Rio de Janeiro. Has experience in the area of Production Engineering, with an emphasis on Multicriteria Decision Theory, acting mainly on the following themes: decision aid, ordinal data, multicriteria decision, data analysis and electricity supply.

References

ANACHE, M.C.A.; LAURENCEL, Luiz da C.Finanças Comportamentais: uma Avaliação Crítica da Moderna Teoria de Finanças. São Paulo: Revista CADE/Mackenzie, v. 12, n. 1, 2013. Disponível em: <http://editorarevistas.mackenzie.br/index.php/cade/article/view/6331>. Acesso em: 20 de nov. de 2019.

ANACHE, M.C.A. Finanças Comportamentais: uma avaliação crítica da moderna teoria de finanças.2008. 149 f. Dissertação (Mestrado em Economia) –Programa de Pós-Graduação em Economia, Universidade Federal do Espírito Santo.

BECKETT, S.Fim de partida. São Paulo: Cosac Naify, 2010.BEN-DAVID,J.; COLLINS,R.Social Factors in the Origins of a New Science: The Case ofPsychology, in BEN-DAVID, J.(ed.), Scientific Growth: Essays on the Social Organization and Ethos of Science.Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 49-70, 1991.

BIANCHI, A.M.. O método na economia: desenvolvimentos recentes, questões e reflexões. Em: DUARTE,Pedro G.;ZILBER,Simão D.; GUILHOTO,Joaquim. (Orgs.). O Brasil e a ciência econômica em debate. 1ed. São Paulo: Saraiva, 2011, v. 2, p. 123-136.BLAUG, M.La Metodología de la Economía o Cómo explican los Economistas. Alianza Editorial, Madrid, 1985.

CALDWELL, B.J. Does methodology matter? How should it be practiced? FinnishEconomic Papers, v. 3, n. 1, p. 64-71, 1990.

COLANDER, D.; HOLT, R.P.F.; ROSSER, JR.; BARKLEY, J. The changing face of mainstream economics. Review of Political Economy, v. 16, n.4, 2004.

COLANDER, D. The Death of Neoclassical Economics. Journal of the History of Economic Thought, v. 22, n. 2, p. 127-143, 2000.

DAVIS, J.B. The turn in recent economics and return of orthodoxy. Cambridge Journal of Economics, v. 32, p. 349-366, 2008. Revista Scientiarum Historia, 2019, 1(1): e0288.

ELSNER,W. State and Future of the ‘Citadel’ and of the Heterodoxies in Economics:Challenges and Dangers, Convergences and Cooperation. European Journal of Economics and Economic Policies: Intervention, v. 10, n. 3, p.286-298, 2013.

GINTIS,H. A Framework for the Unification of the Behavioral Sciences. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, v. 30, n. 1, p. 1-61, 2007.

GLEISER, M.. Criação imperfeita. São Paulo: Record, 2010.HANDS, D.W. Reflections without rules: economic methodology and contemporany science theory.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001.

HANSEN, L.P.; SARGENT, T.J. Wanting Robustness in Macroeconomics. Unpublished manuscript, University of Chicago and New York University, 2000. Disponível em: <http://home.uchicago.edu/~lhansen/wanting.pdf>. Acesso em: 25 de ago. de 2019.KUHN, T. A estrutura das revoluções científicas. 7. Ed. São Paulo: Perspectiva, 2003[1962].

LAKATOS, I. La metodología de los programas de investigación científica. Madrid: Alianza, 1989 [1978].POPPER, K. O realismo e o objetivo da ciência(pós-escrita à lógica da descoberta científica). Lisboa: Dom Quixote. 1987.

SARGENT, T.J. Bounded Rationality in Macroeconomics. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1993.

Published
2019-12-12
How to Cite
de Carvalho Azevedo Anache, M., Benevenuto Guisard Koehler, C., & da Costa Laurencel, L. (2019). Pluralism in economic science or a transitory state toward a new post-neoclassical mainstream?. Scientiarum Historia Magazine, 1, 8. https://doi.org/10.51919/revista_sh.v1i0.28
Issue
Vol 1 (2020): Scientiarum Historia
Section
História e Filosofia das Ciências e da Matemática

Todos os artigos publicados na Revista Scientiarum Historia recebem a licença Creative Commons - Atribuição 4.0 Internacional (CC BY 4.0).

Todas as publicações subsequentes, completas ou parciais, deverão ser feitas com o reconhecimento, nas citações, da Revista Scientiarum Historia como a editora original do artigo.