EVALUATION OF ECONOMIC EXPANSIONISM THROUGH THE PRISM OF MULTIPLE DISCIPLINARITY

Slavica Manić

DOI Number
https://doi.org/10.22190/TEME1803979M
First page
979
Last page
997

Abstract


Economics has been uttered, spoken and written about more than it is studied and/or understood. It impregnates our lives to such extent that the claim "now and then we're all economists” represents a meaningful, though not necessarily true statement (except, possibly, in a very narrow sense when it is grasped as a skill). However, economics, like any other science, would be superfluous "if the form and essence directly coincide." Although economists do not dispute the interweaving of science and skills, most of them will say that economics has established itself as a scientific discipline with particular field of research. Also, a number of economists will support transfer and exchange of ideas, concepts and methods among different research fields. Consequently, economists will in principle accept expansionism as a positive trend bringing to economics and other disciplines nothing but benefits. The aim of this paper is to indicate (through a review of relevant literature) economics’ attempt to realize its expansionist ambitions in order to establish itself as a universal science (general philosophy of the society) by misinterpreting or even abusing thе idea of multiple disciplinarity.


Keywords

expansionism, economics imperialism, interdisciplinarity, multidisciplinarity, multiple disciplinarity.

Full Text:

PDF (Cрпски)

References


Akerlof, G. (1983), Loyalty Filters. American Economie Review, 73(1), 54-63.

Becker, G.S. (1976). The economic approach to human behavior. Chicago: Chicago University Press.

Biglan, A. (1975). The characteristics of subject matter in different academic areas. Journal of Applied Psychology, 57(3), 195-203

Bridges, D. (2006). The Disciplines and the Discipline of Educational Research, Journal of Philosophy of Education, 40 (2), 259-272

Collander, D., Holt, R. & Rosser, J. (2004). The changing face of mainstream economics, Review of Political Economy, 16(4), 485-499.

Coleman, J. (1990). Foundations of Social Theory. Harvard University Press.

Coyle, D. (2012). Economics education after the crisis: are graduate students fit for purpose? Retrieved from: http://www.res.org.uk/view/article5apr12Correspondence.html

Davis, J. (2015). Economics imperialism versus multidisciplinarity, 2015 STOREP Conference Plenary Lecture, Retrieved from: http://www.johnbryandavis.net/uploads/2/2/7/3/22734340/econ_imperialism.pdf

Davis, J. (2013). Economics, Neuroeconomics, and the Problem of Identity, Retrieved from: http://epublications.marquette.edu/econ_workingpapers/53

Davis, J. (2010). Mäki on economics imperialism. Retrieved from http://epublications.marquette.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1003&context=econ_workingpapers

Davis, J. (2008). The turn in recent economics and the return of orthodoxy. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 32(3), 349-366.

Davis, J. (2007). The turn in recent economics and return of orthodoxy. Retrieved from http://ssrn.com/abstract=1004064

Dow, S. (2013). Formalism, rationality and evidence: the case of behavioural economics, In: Special issue in honour of Mark Blaug, Erasmus Journal for Philosophy and Economics, 6(3), 26-43.

Ellison, S. (2014). Attack of the cyborgs: Economic imperialism and the human deficit in educational policy-making & research. Journal of Educational Controversy, 8(1), 1-15.

Emmett, R.B. (2009). History of economics and history of science: A comparative look at recent work in both fields. Retrieved from https://www.academia.edu/1108264/History_of_economics_and_history_of_science_A_comparative_look_at_recent_work_in_both_fields.

Fine, B. (2000). Economics imperialism and intellectual progress: The present as history of economic thought? History of Economics Review, 32(1), 10-36.

Fine, B. & Milonakis, D. (2009). From economics imperialism to freakonomics: The shifting boundaries between economics and other social sciences. New York: Routledge.

Fox, J. (2013). The end of economists imperialism. Retrieved from: https://hbr.org/2013/01/the-end-of-economists-imper.html.

Friedman, D. (1999), Evolutionary Economics Goes Mainstream: A Review of The Theory of Learning in Games. Retrieved from: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.399.2801&rep=rep1&type=pdf

Fuller S. (1991), Disciplinary boundaries and the rhetoric of the social sciences. Poetics Today, 12(2), 301–325.

Goel, S. (2010). Well rounded curriculum – an insight from Biglan’s classification of disciplines, Retrieved from: https://goelsan.wordpress.com/2010/07/27/biglans-classification-of-disciplines/

Granovetter, M. & Swedberg, R. (eds.). (1992). The Sociology of Economic Life. Westview Press.

Hausmann, D. (1992). The limits of economic science, In: Hausman, D. (ed.), Essays on Philosophy and Economic Methodology, (pp. 99-105), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Kalleberg, A. (1995). Sociology and Economics: Crossing the Boundaries, Social Forces, 73(4), 1207-1218

King, J. (2013). A case for pluralism in economics, The Economic and Labour Relations Review, 24(1), 17-31.

Krishnan, A. (2009). What are Academic Disciplines, Some Observations on the Disciplinarity vs Interdisciplinarity debate, Retrieved from: http://eprints.ncrm.ac.uk/783/1/what_are_academic_disciplines.pdf

Lattuca, L., Terenzini, P., Harper, B.J. & Yin, A. (2010), Academic environments in detail: Holland’s theory at the sub-discipline level, Research in Higher Education, 51(1), 21-39.

Lazear, E. (2000). Economic imperialism. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 115(1), 99-146.

Leape, J. (2012). Good economists need more than economics: multidisciplinary LSE 100 course“. In: Coyle, D. (ed.) What’s the use of economics? Teaching the dismal science after the crisis. (pp. 183-192). London, UK: London Publishing Partnership.

Lehtinen, U. (2013). Multidisciplinarity in theory building: possibilities of combining, Retrieved from: http://eujournal.org/index.php/esj/article/viewFile/1225/1234

Lyotard, J. M. (1984). The Postmodern Condition, A Report on Knowledge, Manchester: Manchester University Press

Mäki, U. (2008). Economics imperialism: Concept and constraints. Retrieved from http://www.helsinki.fi/tint/maki/materials/ImpCCproofs3.pdf.

Mirowski, P. (2002). Machine dream: Economics becomes a cyborg science. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Oswick, C. Feleming, P. & Hanlon, G. (2011). From Borrowing to Blending: Rethinking the Processes of Organizational Theory Building, Academy of Management Review, 36(2), 318 – 337.

Panhans, M.T. & J.D. Singleton, J.D. (2015). The empirical economist’s toolkit: From models to methods. CHOPE Working Paper No. 2015-03, Center for the History of Political Economy, Duke University. Retrieved from http://hope.econ.duke.edu/node/1126.

Petrisor, A.I. (2013). Multi-, trans- and inter-disciplinarity, essential conditions for the sustainable development of human habitat, Retrieved from: http://uac.incd.ro/Art/v4n2a06.pdf

Pforr, T. (2015). Meaning construction and the socialisation of economic ideas: an autobiographical approach. PhD thesis, University of Warwick.

Pomorina, I. & Lait, A. (2012), What post-crisis changes does the economics discipline need? Retrieved from: http://www.res.org.uk/view/article5apr12Correspondence.html

Rothschild, K.W. (2008). Economic imperialism. Retrieved from http://www.analyse-und-kritik.net/2008-2/AK_Rothschild_2008.pdf

Savoiu, G. & V. Dinu, (2015). Economic Paradoxism and Meson Economics, Amfiteatru Economic, 17(39), 776-798.

Savoiu, G. (2014). The impact of inter -, trans – and multidisciplinarity on modern taxonomy of sciences, Current Science, 106(5), 685 – 690.

Sharma, S.K. (2014), Multi-disciplinarity of sciences, current economics and business, International Journal of Multidisciplinarity in Business and Science, 1(1), 1-5.

Solow, R. M. (2008). The state of macroeconomics, Journal of Economic Perspectives, 22(1), 243-246.

Stilwell, F. (2012). Teaching political economy: Making a difference? Retrieved from http://spe.library.utoronto.ca/index.php/spe/article/view/18578/15509

WEF (2016), Global Competitiveness Report 2016-2017.




DOI: https://doi.org/10.22190/TEME1803979M

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Print ISSN: 0353-7919
Online ISSN: 1820-7804