Kaleidic Society

Defining Heterodox Economics

How should we decide whether a school of economic thought is heterodox or mainstream? The line is not always very clear. We can safely say that economics in the style of Paul Samuelson, the neoclassical synthesis, is mainstream, but that is an easy case. One way to draw the line is to look at other areas of study that the school resembles. Does it resemble physics? Philosophy? Or perhaps sociology? I would suggest that any school which resembles physics or mathematics is mainstream. Even this is not always a good heuristic, since econophysics is not particularly mainstream. Another method of categorizing is to look at who founded or popularized the school. If the founder was English, it is probably mainstream. There are a number of other interesting ways of categorizing schools, based on differing perspectives on capital, interest, and other concepts, as well.

Comments

MatthewWilliam said:

This website does a good breakdown of the taxonomy of economics schools: homepage.newschool.edu/het

# July 5, 2009 3:22 PM

martinf said:

Evolutionary economics (Winter, Nelson...) does economics using maths, but they are not in the mainstream either.

But that might be a good approximation, given that most papers published in the "best" journals have that math flavor.

# July 14, 2009 10:24 AM