From Lars Syll Based on our interviews, heterodox economics appears to be a positive project, inevitably defined somewhat in terms of the mainstream but not exhaustively so. It is also efficacious, with policy and real-world impact. It is a complex object, not amenable to definition by a single criterion. Its dimensions are partly intellectual, in terms of what it believes. It holds a realist position. It is concerned with asymmetric power relations, in the economy and in the economics discipline, highlights their negative effects, makes explicit the normative character of economics and the economy, and leans towards action which seeks to improve the state of the economy and the discipline. This means it fosters the capacity to deliberate social and ecological goals and norms openly instead
Topics:
Lars Pålsson Syll considers the following as important: Uncategorized
This could be interesting, too:
John Quiggin writes RBA policy is putting all our futures at risk
Merijn T. Knibbe writes ´Extra Unordinarily Persistent Large Otput Gaps´ (EU-PLOGs)
Peter Radford writes The Geology of Economics?
John Quiggin writes Suggestions for a small experiment
from Lars Syll
Based on our interviews, heterodox economics appears to be a positive project, inevitably defined somewhat in terms of the mainstream but not exhaustively so. It is also efficacious, with policy and real-world impact. It is a complex object, not amenable to definition by a single criterion. Its dimensions are partly intellectual, in terms of what it believes. It holds a realist position. It is concerned with asymmetric power relations, in the economy and in the economics discipline, highlights their negative effects, makes explicit the normative character of economics and the economy, and leans towards action which seeks to improve the state of the economy and the discipline. This means it fosters the capacity to deliberate social and ecological goals and norms openly instead of reducing economic reasoning to mathematics or relinquishing thinking to mechanisms that are insulated from debate. Its members see themselves as agents who act against what they perceive to be the unrealistic and monist structures of the mainstream by building alternative structures. These structures embody pluralism, which must include heterodox economics and, perhaps, elements of mainstream economics where these are consistent with the identified features of heterodoxy; and has several pillars, including pedagogic and epistemological. Furthermore, we find the themes of power and pluralism are interwoven with the concern for realism, what we have called realist pluralism. Hence, power and pluralism seem not to be valued in themselves, but in the pursuit of truth …
Heterodox economics remains diverse. Such a conclusion may irk those who decry the apparent messiness of heterodoxy. We would argue though that the account here shows that while questions remain, our identification of realism, power, and pluralism as key themes shared by our interviewees lends heterodox economics some coherence. Hence, we view heterodox economics as coherently messy.