Treść książki
Przejdź do opcji czytnikaPrzejdź do nawigacjiPrzejdź do informacjiPrzejdź do stopki
8
.
Introduction
economicstoothersocialscienceshasbeennoticed.ItiscalledHreverse
imperialism.”
However,manyeconomists(theauthorofthisbookamongthem)arguethat
despitethechanges,thefoundationsofeconomicshavenotreallychanged
andmainstreameconomicspredominatelyworksasitusedtobe(e.g.,(Berg,
&Gigerenzer,2010;Dobusch,&Kapeller,2009;Dow,2012;Elsner,2013;Fine,
2019;Fourcade,Ollion,&Algan,2015;Hodgson,2012b;Madra,2016;Ostapiuk,
2019a)).Everyoneagreesthateconomicshasincorporatedmanyinsightsfrom
othersocialsciences.However,theyareonlyadjustmentsandtheparadigm
hasnotchanged.Economistsstillrelyonrationality,utility,equilibrium,homo
economicus,revealedpreferences,deductivethinking,andmathematics.
Torecognizethatneoclassicaleconomicshasnotchangedwecanlookatthe
syllabusesandtextbooksusedbymosteconomicsstudentsaroundtheworld
(Colander,2015;Graupe,2019).Ofcourse,thechangeintextbooksandsyllabuses
isslowerthanthechangesinspecialisticjournals.However,theyhavean
enormousinfluenceonmillionsofeconomicsstudents.AsSamuelsonwrites
HIdon’tcarewhowritesanation’slaws-orcraftsitsadvancedtreaties-ifIcan
writeitseconomicstextbooks”(Samuelson,ascitedinSkousen,1997,p.150).
Theunmodifiedeconomicstextbooksshowthatthechangeconcernsparticular
branchesofeconomics(e.g.,behaviouraleconomics,institutionaleconomics,
evolutionaryeconomics,complexityeconomics),whereasmosteconomists
useatoolkitofneoclassicaleconomics.Whatcanbeevenmoreimportantin
thisstoryishoweconomistsareperceivedbyothersocialscientistsandpublic
opinion.Here,wewillnotgointothediscussionofhowmuchblameweshould
assesstoeconomistsforthebadimageofhomoeconomicuswhichisperceived
asafullyegoisticandrationalcalculator.Now,itisimportanttopointoutthat
thecriticismofneoclassicaleconomicsisnotastrawman.Someeconomists
reallybelievethathomoeconomicusexistsandthateconomicsisvalue-free.Itis
especiallyimportant,becausetheoriesarethelensesbywhicheconomistslook
atrealityandpeople.
Theintroductionofthisbookshouldgiveareaderanimpression,sharedby
many,thateconomicsisinaprocessofsomekindofHparadigmshift”((Kuhn,
1962);seealso(Colanderetal.,2004;Davis,2006;Dobusch,&Kapeller,2012;
Dow,2012;Etzioni,2011;Thaler,2015,2016)).1
Mosteconomistsseethelimitationsofneoclassicaleconomics.However,they
arenotsurehowthefutureofeconomicsshouldlooklike.Whetherneoclassical
economicsshouldchangedramaticallyoradjustalittlebyaddingthebitsof
1
Theexpectationforchangeineconomicsismostlyvisibleinthecaseofmovementslike
HInstituteforNewEconomicThinking”andHRethinkingeconomics”.
