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 for greater plurality, it would emerge on its own, and (3) the assertion that pluralism means 'anything goes' and is, thus, unscientific. Pluralist responses to all three arguments are summarized. The third argument is shown to relate to a greater challenge for pluralism: an epistemological trade-off between diversity and consensus that suggests moving from a discussion about 'pros' and 'cons' towards a discussion about the adequate degree of plurality. The paper shows how the trade-off originates from two main challenges: the need to derive adequate quality criteria for a pluralist economics, and the necessity to propose strategies that facilitate the communication across different research programs. It concludes with some strategies to meet these challenges.

Dynamics of the politico‐administrative conflicts of resource control in Nigeria: Exploring the oil politics of who gets what, when, and how

“…The proponents of this theory are Robert A. Dahl, David Truman, and Seymour Martin Lipset. Pluralism is the lifeblood of a democracy, supporting the existence of diverse and competing interests, as well as various forms and distribution of resources (Ash, 2021; Gräbner (2017) and Gräbner and Strunk (2020). Although politics is largely shaped by governments, civil society also exerts its influence upon polities.…”

Defending De-idealization in Economic Modeling: A Case Study

“…In the aftermath of Rodrik’s Economic Rules (Rodrik 2015), many scholars have strongly defended the advantages and desirability of a greater pluralism in the methods, the aims and the topics of current economic research. Among them, several philosophers of economics started focusing their attention on families of models, rather than on single models, in order to discuss interesting methodological issues (Aydinonat 2018; Gräbner and Strunk 2020; Grüne-Yanoff and Marchionni 2018; Lisciandra and Korbmacher 2021; Veit 2019). Despite their different views on economic modeling, the shared idea is that knowledge accumulation in economics mainly proceeds “horizontally,” that is, by developing many different and sometimes mutually inconsistent models of the same target, each of which is only partial and highly context-sensitive.…”

Economy Studies

“…The history of economic thought thus casts serious doubt on the assumption that the current mainstream is always necessarily better (e.g. Akerlof, 2020;Backhouse, 1994;Blaug, 2001;Cedrini & Fontana, 2018;Cedrini & Fontana, 2015;Colander & Landreth, 1998;Davis, 2006;Dequech, 2017;Dow, 2009;Fourcade, 2009;Gans & Shepherd, 1994;Gräbner & Strunk, 2020;Lee, 2009;Morgan & Rutherford, 1998;Samuels et al, 2008;Weintraub, 2002).…”

“…As their education teaches them that there are multiple perspectives on issues and focuses on developing skills to understand and compare these perspectives, students will be better prepared to work in interdisciplinary teams and communicate with non-economists. However, sometimes it is argued that pluralism will complicate communication among economists, as it means they would use different approaches rather than all adhering to the same approach (Gräbner & Strunk, 2020). If economists would…”