"Why is Economics not an Evolutionary Science?" New Answers to Veblen's Old Question

  title={"Why is Economics not an Evolutionary Science?" New Answers to Veblen's Old Question},
  author={Leonhard Dobusch and Jakob Kapeller},
  journal={Journal of Economic Issues},
  pages={867 - 898}
Addressing the question why Economics as a discipline is not subject to evolutive processes itself, we explain the paradigmatical dominance of neoclassical theories in Economics as a path dependent process. Recognizing economics as "locked into neoclassical thinking," we first identify three positive feedback mechanisms leading to strong barriers to paradigmatic change: coordination, complementarity, and learning mechanisms. In a second step, we show how actors strategically enforce these… 

Heterodox Economics and the Scientist's Role in Society

The present work starts from a simple question: Why should a state pay the salary for an academic researcher in economics? Generally speaking, research should be financed because it is useful for

One Long Argument in Economics: Explaining Intellectual Inertia in terms of Evolutionary Ontology

In this article, we explain in terms of evolutionary ontology whether (and to what extent) economics has become an evolutionary science since Veblen published his seminal paper in 1898, “Why is

A Guide to Paradigmatic Self-Marginalization: Lessons for Post-Keynesian Economists

While many heterodox economists hope that the recent financial crisis will lead to paradigmatic change in economics, we argue that path-dependent processes and institutional factors within the

‘Model-Platonism’ in economics: on a classical epistemological critique

Abstract Roughly 50 years ago, the eminent German philosopher and social scientist Hans Albert presented a critique of ‘Model-Platonism’ in economics to describe essential elements of the

The Complexity of Economies and Pluralism in Economics

From the two premises that (1) economies are complex systems and (2) the accumulation of knowledge about reality is desirable, I derive the conclusion that pluralism with regard to economic research

Introduction: change and persistence in contemporary economics

All contributions in this issue of Science in Context explore research questions at the intersection of sociology, economics, and the history of economic thought.

Monism in modern science: The case of (micro-)economics

This elaboration starts by deciphering modern science as a social subsystem being loosely coupled to the rest of society (section 2.1). Additionally, the way in which modern (monistic) economics was

Interactive macroeconomics: A pluralist simulator

A digital learning platform is developed to present and explore some controversies at the very foundations of macroeconomic theory, and explicitly present two competing paradigms, the new-Keynesian and the post-Keyneian one.

Pluralism in Economics: Epistemological Rationales and Pedagogical Implementation

This paper first presents a series of epistemological rationales for pluralism as a guiding concept in economic research. In doing so, it highlights the inherent uncertainty of (scientific) knowledge

Pluralism in economics: its critiques and their lessons

ABSTRACT This paper starts with an evaluation of three common arguments against pluralism in economics: (1) the claim that economics is already pluralist, (2) the argument that if there was the need



Why Economics is not an Evolutionary Science

A reprint of the article "Why is economics not an evolutionary science?," by T. Veblen, published in the "Quarterly Journal of Economics" is presented. The article questions the premise that physics

What Is Evolutionary Economics

All evolution is concerned with the growth of knowledge, a proposition no less true in economic systems (and society in general) than in biological ones. As the philosopher Elliott Sober (1984)

The Nobel Prize in economics : A barrier to new thinking

The argument of this chapter is essentially that the Bank of Sweden Prize in Memory of Alfred Nobel is normally given to neoclassical economists and thereby strengthens the neoclassical monopoly.

The changing face of mainstream economics

This article argues that economics is currently undergoing a fundamental shift in its method, away from neoclassical economics and into something new. Although that something new has not been fully

The Death of Neoclassical Economics

The term “neoclassical economics” was born in 1900; in this paper I am proposing economist-assisted terminasia; by the powers vested in me as president of the History of Economics Society, I hereby

Essays in Positive Economics

"Stimulating, provocative, often infuriating, but well worth reading."—Peter Newman, Economica "His critical blast blows like a north wind against the more pretentious erections of modern economics.

Three arguments for pluralism in economics

For most mainstream economists, of course, there is only one way to do economics. It requires the construction of a model, collection of relevant data and subsequent testing. The model itself must be

The Nature of Heterodox Economics

This is the last of 10 papers in this journal’s Symposium on Reorienting Economics, which has taken Tony Lawson’s book Reorienting Economics as its focal point. These papers together with Lawson’s

Path Dependence, Competition, and Succession in the Dynamics of Scientific Revolution

What is the relative importance of structural versus contextual forces in the birth and death of scientific theories? We describe a formal dynamic model of the birth, evolution, and death of

Progress in Heterodox Economics

  • R. Backhouse
  • Economics
    Journal of the History of Economic Thought
  • 2000
There is great variety within contemporary economics. As Coats (2000) points out, not only are there several schools of thought that would conventionally be labeled “heterodox,” there are numerous