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...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Review of political economy 2014-10, Vol.26 (4), p.516-525
1. Verfasser: Colander, David
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 &amp; Francis 2014</rights><rights>Copyright Taylor &amp; 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 &amp; 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