✕
Exploring Economics strengthens plural economics and alternative economic approaches.
However, we are running out of money. Currently we have a funding gap of 30,000€.
With a small contribution you can support Exploring Economics to stay online. Thank you!
We are a registered non-profit organization | Bank account: Netzwerk Plurale Ökonomik e.V., IBAN: DE91 4306 0967 6037 9737 00, SWIFT-BIC: GENODEM1GLS | Imprint
427 results
Economic sociology is an entire subfield and one could write an series on it, so I’m going to stick to probably the most prominent economic sociologist and the founder of ‘new economic sociology’, Mark Granovetter.
In the course Sociology and Socialism, students engage with classical theories of socialism as well as their applications in a variety of historical and international contexts. Staunchly interdisciplinary, the course utilizes expertise in philosophy, history, economics, sociology, anthropology and political theory.
In this talk Robert Skidelsky analyses how sociology did and could enrich economic analyses, but also how critical sociological insights have been colonised by mainstream economics.
"A serious reconsideration of the 'economics of science' is long overdue," say Philip Mirowski and Esther-Mirjam Sent in the introduction to Science Bought and Sold. Indeed, it is only recently that one could speak of a field of economics of science at all.
For many, Thomas Carlyle's put-down of economics as "the dismal science" rings true--especially in the aftermath of the crash of 2008. But Diane Coyle argues that economics today is more soulful than dismal, a more practical and human science than ever before. The Soulful Science describes the remarkable creative renaissance in economics, how economic thinking is being applied to the paradoxes of everyday life.
Ever wondered why some countries are rich and others poor Or why some people believe hard work results in upward mobility and others don t To answer these questions you need to see the world sociologically In this introductory sociology course we will explore the concerns of an interconnected global …
The video gives a short explanation of Max Weber's treatment of the protestant work ethic as the explanatory factor for the development of capitalism.
This paper posts a heretical question: Is economics a science after all? The answer to this question impinges on the methodology, hypotheses and results of economic research.
How the brain works, how we learn, and why we sometimes make stupid mistakes.
Critique of neoclassical economics is presented and contrasted with the more realistic assumptions made by an complex adaptive systems and evolutionary approach.
First published in 1983. A collection of papers directed at those outside the field of Economics, to open up discussions around the scientific worth of Economics.
Teaching and learning ontology and epistemology. Onto-what? Bates & Jenkins explain what is needed to equip students with the ability to critically reflect on learned content and understand meta-discussions in their field.
This brief note explores the possibility of working towards an enlarged self-definition of economics through economists’ study and appreciation of economic sociology. Common ground between economic sociology and heterodox economics is explored, and some of Richard Sennett’s ideas are used as prompts to raise some pertinent and hopefully interesting questions about economics. In particular, the note revisits the question of whether there is a possibility of changing our understanding of what kind of social scientific work falls within the domain of economics proper once we start critically engaging with work conventionally considered to be outside of that domain. In part, the note is intended to offer undergraduate students in economics – and possibly even those further down the road in their education – food for thought about what constitutes economics.
This volume is concerned with the different schools within the discipline of economics (theoretical pluralism) and the relationship of economics to other disciplines, such as sociology, political science and philosophy (interdisciplinarity).
Stratification economics is defined as a systemic and empirically grounded approach to addressing intergroup inequality. Stratification economics integrates economics, sociology and social psychology to distinctively analyze inequality across groups that are socially differentiated, be it by race, ethnicity, gender, caste, sexuality, religion or any other social differentiation.
Since their first emergence in the work of Paul David thirty years ago, the dual issues of Path Dependence and Lock-In have become critically important subjects in the fields of economics, sociology, and business strategy.
This collection of essays, a supplement to History of Political Economy, brings together prominent scholars from economics, sociology, literature, and history to examine the role of biography and autobiography in the history of economics. The first of its kind, this volume looks at the relevance of first-person accounts to narrative histories of economics.
Global Social Theory is a large wiki-like project by Gurminder K Bhambra. Its central aim is decolonising and diversifying universities, production of knowledge, and social thought in general.
It represents a large online library divided into three parts: concepts, thinkers, and topics in/of social theory and decolonial thought. Every part comprises of short, introductory articles on an according theme. It may be helpful to give you a general overview (and a list of basic readings) on the most essential areas of social theory: caste, class, and race; civil society; racism; secularism; feminism and many others.
It may also allow students whose university curriculum in sociology, economics, or other social sciences lacks diversity to compensate for that.
This brief views the environment through diverse lenses – those of standard economics, institutional economics, political science, environmental science and ecology.
Tony Lawson has become a major figure of intellectual controversy on the back of juxtaposing two relatively simple and seemingly innocuous ideas. He has argued firstly that success in science depends on finding and using methods, including modes of reasoning, appropriate to the nature of the phenomena being studied, and also that there are important differences between the nature of the objects of study of natural sciences and those of social science.
By conducting a discourse analysis (SKAD) in the field of academic economics textbooks, this paper aims at reconstructing frames and identity options offered to undergraduate students relating to the questions ‘Why study economics?’ and ‘Who do I become by studying economics?’. The analysis showed three major frames and respective identity offerings, all of which are contextualized theoretically, with prominent reference to the Foucauldian reflection of the science of Political Economy. Surprisingly, none of them encourages the student to think critically, as could have been expected in a pedagogical context. Taken together, economics textbooks appear as a “total structure of actions brought to bear upon possible action” (Foucault), therefore, as a genuine example of Foucauldian power structures.
In the history of the social sciences, few individuals have exerted as much influence as has Jeremy Bentham. His attempt to become “the Newton of morals” has left a marked impression upon the methodology and form of analysis that social sciences like economics and political science have chosen as modus operandi.
This course focus on the behaviour of individuals from an pluralist economic and an interdisciplinary bevavioural science apprach.
Economics has become a monolithic science, variously described as formalistic and autistic with neoclassical orthodoxy reigning supreme. So argue Dimitris Milonakis and Ben Fine in this new major work of critical recollection.
“Economics is the science which studies human behaviour as a relationship between ends and scarce means which have alternative uses1.” This is how Lionel Robbins came to define economics in the early 1930s and there is a good chance that many of you heard a variant of this definition in your first Economics 101 lecture.
Is or has economics ever been the imperial social science? Could or should it ever be so? These are the central concerns of this book. It involves a critical reflection on the process of how economics became the way it is, in terms of a narrow and intolerant orthodoxy, that has, nonetheless, increasingly directed its attention to appropriating the subject matter of other social sciences through the process termed "economics imperialism".
Best-selling books such as Freakonomics and The Undercover Economist have paved the way for the flourishing economics-made-fun genre. While books like these present economics as a strong and explanatory science, the ongoing economic crisis has exposed the shortcomings of economics to the general public.
Mainstream textbooks present economics as an objective science free from value judgements; that settles disputes by testing hypotheses; that applies a pre-determined body of principles; and contains policy prescriptions supported by a consensus of professional opinion.
This book represents a new foundation for the study of microeconomics, viewed from a broad perspective that takes into account new developments at the intersections with psychology, political science, the natural sciences and philosophy.
Michael Kalecki famously remarked “I have found out what economics is; it is the science of confusing stocks with flows”. Stock-Flow Consistent (SFC) models were developed precisely to address this kind of confusion. The basic intuition of SFC models is that the economy is built up as a set of intersecting balance sheets, where transactions between entities are called flows and the value of the assets/liabilities they hold are called stocks. Wages are a flow; bank deposits are a stock, and confusing the two directly is a category error. In this edition of the pluralist showcase I will first describe the logic of SFC models – which is worth exploring in depth – before discussing empirical calibration and applications of the models. Warning that there is a little more maths in this post than usual (i.e. some), but you should be able to skip those parts and still easily get the picture.
Transition from central planning to a market economy, involving large-scale institutional change and reforms at all levels, is often described as the greatest social science experiment in modern times.
In this lecture Mirowski claims that a good critique of and alternative to neoclassical economics should focus on microeconomics. In addition, he claims that mainstream economics is not about a specific "human nature", instead the understanding of markets (partially based on Hayek) is of special importance. As an alternative Mirowski proposes institutionalist economics that builds upon how markets work nowadays (e.g. links to computer science).
We use cookies on our website. Click on Accept to help us to make Exploring Economics constantly better!