The Wrong Type of Pluralism: Toward a Transdisciplinary Social Science
When heterodox economists talk of pluralism they are generally talking about pluralism within the economics profession-they are asking: how can we have a more pluralistic economics profession? This paper argues that another, perhaps more useful, way to think of pluralism and economics is from the pe...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Review of political economy 2014-10, Vol.26 (4), p.516-525 |
---|---|
1. Verfasser: | |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 525 |
---|---|
container_issue | 4 |
container_start_page | 516 |
container_title | Review of political economy |
container_volume | 26 |
creator | Colander, David |
description | When heterodox economists talk of pluralism they are generally talking about pluralism within the economics profession-they are asking: how can we have a more pluralistic economics profession? This paper argues that another, perhaps more useful, way to think of pluralism and economics is from the perspective of all the social sciences. When considered in reference to the social science profession rather than in reference to the economics profession, the amount of pluralism increases significantly, since different social sciences follow quite different methodologies. But looking at pluralism from the social science perspective reveals a different type of pluralism problem in social science. While there may be plenty of pluralism within social science as a whole, there is a serious question about whether it is appropriately distributed. This paper argues that heterodox economists' agenda should be a greater blending of all the social science departments. It summarizes proposals to do so on both the undergraduate level and graduate level, and explains why supporting variations of these proposals would be a strategy that would further the objectives of most heterodox economists more than would their current strategy of pushing for more pluralism in economics. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1080/09538259.2014.950460 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_infor</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1680145946</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>3507871831</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c581t-1e600fbc6ff161791ae5202e819901ac213a51a3fac2ff7f5c2d51071af577db3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkU9LJDEQxYOs4Kz6DTwEvOylx6p0J93xIov4DwQFWzyGmE40kunMJjPIfHvTjF72IJ6qDr_3qHqPkCOEOUIHJyB53TEu5wywmUsOjYAdMsNG8KqWHftFZhNSTcwe-Z3zGwCyhosZuexfLX1KcXyh_WZpaXT0PqyTDj4vTmkf33UaqKZ90mMefDZ-Gfyo04Y-RON1oA_G29HYA7LrdMj28HPuk8fLi_78urq9u7o5_3tbGd7hqkIrANyzEc6hwFaitpwBsx1KCagNw1pz1LUrq3Ot44YNHKFF7XjbDs_1Pvmz9V2m-G9t80otylE2BD3auM4KRVci4LIRP0Br0QhEZAU9_g99i-s0lkcKxToAydhENVvKpJhzsk4tk1-ULBSCmnpQXz2oqQe17aHIzrYyP7qYFvo9pjCold6EmFyJ1fis6m8dPgCYkoxx</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1628009222</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>The Wrong Type of Pluralism: Toward a Transdisciplinary Social Science</title><source>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</source><source>Business Source Complete</source><source>Political Science Complete</source><creator>Colander, David</creator><creatorcontrib>Colander, David</creatorcontrib><description>When heterodox economists talk of pluralism they are generally talking about pluralism within the economics profession-they are asking: how can we have a more pluralistic economics profession? This paper argues that another, perhaps more useful, way to think of pluralism and economics is from the perspective of all the social sciences. When considered in reference to the social science profession rather than in reference to the economics profession, the amount of pluralism increases significantly, since different social sciences follow quite different methodologies. But looking at pluralism from the social science perspective reveals a different type of pluralism problem in social science. While there may be plenty of pluralism within social science as a whole, there is a serious question about whether it is appropriately distributed. This paper argues that heterodox economists' agenda should be a greater blending of all the social science departments. It summarizes proposals to do so on both the undergraduate level and graduate level, and explains why supporting variations of these proposals would be a strategy that would further the objectives of most heterodox economists more than would their current strategy of pushing for more pluralism in economics.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0953-8259</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1465-3982</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1080/09538259.2014.950460</identifier><identifier>CODEN: RPECEI</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>London: Routledge</publisher><subject>Economic theory ; Economists ; Interdisciplinary research ; Objectivity ; Pluralism ; Political economy ; Professions ; Science ; Social Sciences ; Studies</subject><ispartof>Review of political economy, 2014-10, Vol.26 (4), p.516-525</ispartof><rights>2014 Taylor & Francis 2014</rights><rights>Copyright Taylor & Francis Ltd. 2014</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c581t-1e600fbc6ff161791ae5202e819901ac213a51a3fac2ff7f5c2d51071af577db3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c581t-1e600fbc6ff161791ae5202e819901ac213a51a3fac2ff7f5c2d51071af577db3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27903,27904</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Colander, David</creatorcontrib><title>The Wrong Type of Pluralism: Toward a Transdisciplinary Social Science</title><title>Review of political economy</title><description>When heterodox economists talk of pluralism they are generally talking about pluralism within the economics profession-they are asking: how can we have a more pluralistic economics profession? This paper argues that another, perhaps more useful, way to think of pluralism and economics is from the perspective of all the social sciences. When considered in reference to the social science profession rather than in reference to the economics profession, the amount of pluralism increases significantly, since different social sciences follow quite different methodologies. But looking at pluralism from the social science perspective reveals a different type of pluralism problem in social science. While there may be plenty of pluralism within social science as a whole, there is a serious question about whether it is appropriately distributed. This paper argues that heterodox economists' agenda should be a greater blending of all the social science departments. It summarizes proposals to do so on both the undergraduate level and graduate level, and explains why supporting variations of these proposals would be a strategy that would further the objectives of most heterodox economists more than would their current strategy of pushing for more pluralism in economics.</description><subject>Economic theory</subject><subject>Economists</subject><subject>Interdisciplinary research</subject><subject>Objectivity</subject><subject>Pluralism</subject><subject>Political economy</subject><subject>Professions</subject><subject>Science</subject><subject>Social Sciences</subject><subject>Studies</subject><issn>0953-8259</issn><issn>1465-3982</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2014</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7UB</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkU9LJDEQxYOs4Kz6DTwEvOylx6p0J93xIov4DwQFWzyGmE40kunMJjPIfHvTjF72IJ6qDr_3qHqPkCOEOUIHJyB53TEu5wywmUsOjYAdMsNG8KqWHftFZhNSTcwe-Z3zGwCyhosZuexfLX1KcXyh_WZpaXT0PqyTDj4vTmkf33UaqKZ90mMefDZ-Gfyo04Y-RON1oA_G29HYA7LrdMj28HPuk8fLi_78urq9u7o5_3tbGd7hqkIrANyzEc6hwFaitpwBsx1KCagNw1pz1LUrq3Ot44YNHKFF7XjbDs_1Pvmz9V2m-G9t80otylE2BD3auM4KRVci4LIRP0Br0QhEZAU9_g99i-s0lkcKxToAydhENVvKpJhzsk4tk1-ULBSCmnpQXz2oqQe17aHIzrYyP7qYFvo9pjCold6EmFyJ1fis6m8dPgCYkoxx</recordid><startdate>20141002</startdate><enddate>20141002</enddate><creator>Colander, David</creator><general>Routledge</general><general>Taylor & Francis Ltd</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7UB</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>JBE</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20141002</creationdate><title>The Wrong Type of Pluralism: Toward a Transdisciplinary Social Science</title><author>Colander, David</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c581t-1e600fbc6ff161791ae5202e819901ac213a51a3fac2ff7f5c2d51071af577db3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2014</creationdate><topic>Economic theory</topic><topic>Economists</topic><topic>Interdisciplinary research</topic><topic>Objectivity</topic><topic>Pluralism</topic><topic>Political economy</topic><topic>Professions</topic><topic>Science</topic><topic>Social Sciences</topic><topic>Studies</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Colander, David</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><jtitle>Review of political economy</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Colander, David</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>The Wrong Type of Pluralism: Toward a Transdisciplinary Social Science</atitle><jtitle>Review of political economy</jtitle><date>2014-10-02</date><risdate>2014</risdate><volume>26</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>516</spage><epage>525</epage><pages>516-525</pages><issn>0953-8259</issn><eissn>1465-3982</eissn><coden>RPECEI</coden><abstract>When heterodox economists talk of pluralism they are generally talking about pluralism within the economics profession-they are asking: how can we have a more pluralistic economics profession? This paper argues that another, perhaps more useful, way to think of pluralism and economics is from the perspective of all the social sciences. When considered in reference to the social science profession rather than in reference to the economics profession, the amount of pluralism increases significantly, since different social sciences follow quite different methodologies. But looking at pluralism from the social science perspective reveals a different type of pluralism problem in social science. While there may be plenty of pluralism within social science as a whole, there is a serious question about whether it is appropriately distributed. This paper argues that heterodox economists' agenda should be a greater blending of all the social science departments. It summarizes proposals to do so on both the undergraduate level and graduate level, and explains why supporting variations of these proposals would be a strategy that would further the objectives of most heterodox economists more than would their current strategy of pushing for more pluralism in economics.</abstract><cop>London</cop><pub>Routledge</pub><doi>10.1080/09538259.2014.950460</doi><tpages>10</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0953-8259 |
ispartof | Review of political economy, 2014-10, Vol.26 (4), p.516-525 |
issn | 0953-8259 1465-3982 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1680145946 |
source | Worldwide Political Science Abstracts; Business Source Complete; Political Science Complete |
subjects | Economic theory Economists Interdisciplinary research Objectivity Pluralism Political economy Professions Science Social Sciences Studies |
title | The Wrong Type of Pluralism: Toward a Transdisciplinary Social Science |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-26T23%3A45%3A07IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_infor&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=The%20Wrong%20Type%20of%20Pluralism:%20Toward%20a%20Transdisciplinary%20Social%20Science&rft.jtitle=Review%20of%20political%20economy&rft.au=Colander,%20David&rft.date=2014-10-02&rft.volume=26&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=516&rft.epage=525&rft.pages=516-525&rft.issn=0953-8259&rft.eissn=1465-3982&rft.coden=RPECEI&rft_id=info:doi/10.1080/09538259.2014.950460&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_infor%3E3507871831%3C/proquest_infor%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1628009222&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |