On the liberty of thought and discussion in economics

This thesis offers a new justification and interpretation of “pluralism in economics” and discusses how it can be implemented. Calls for pluralism reflect discontent with the exclusive dominance of one approach in economics. This perceived monism entails twofold oppression of contesting theories wit...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Eliassen, Roman Linneberg
Published: Anglia Ruskin University 2016
Subjects:
Online Access:http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.698901
id ndltd-bl.uk-oai-ethos.bl.uk-698901
record_format oai_dc
spelling ndltd-bl.uk-oai-ethos.bl.uk-6989012018-05-12T03:14:17ZOn the liberty of thought and discussion in economicsEliassen, Roman Linneberg2016This thesis offers a new justification and interpretation of “pluralism in economics” and discusses how it can be implemented. Calls for pluralism reflect discontent with the exclusive dominance of one approach in economics. This perceived monism entails twofold oppression of contesting theories with a legitimate claim to truth and of the academics that promote them. A doctrine of pluralism thus has to satisfy both an epistemological and a moral condition. However, the literature on pluralism in economics either overly associates pluralism with heterodox economics or fails to provide sufficient epistemological and institutional recommendations. The thesis seeks to abstract from the content of current orthodox and heterodox theory in order to give a consistent interpretation of pluralism as a stable and lasting doctrine. Firstly, given epistemic uncertainty, pluralism is required for the advancement of knowledge, the consequences of which are drawn by application of Mill’s arguments for the liberty of thought and discussion and their further development in Feyerabend’s methodological pluralism. Secondly, the doctrine must secure the right of all academics to pursue truth in the ways they deem fit. Drawing on Habermas’ theory of communicative rationality and Longino’s norms for scientific discourse, ideal conditions for pluralist scientific exchange are delineated. Reviewing sociological evidence, it is shown that there is a well-organized hierarchical system in the discipline that reinforces monism through education, journals, hiring/promotion and research funding. Given these constraints, the calls for pluralism amount to a call for liberal education reform in economics, in which the aim is to foster the intellectual development of students. Pluralism is not about accommodating a range of approaches; pluralism ensures an environment that yields academics capable of truth pursuit in a world of uncertain knowledge. However, intricate links between economics and power relations in society may inhibit its feasibility.330.01Anglia Ruskin Universityhttp://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.698901http://arro.anglia.ac.uk/701254/Electronic Thesis or Dissertation
collection NDLTD
sources NDLTD
topic 330.01
spellingShingle 330.01
Eliassen, Roman Linneberg
On the liberty of thought and discussion in economics
description This thesis offers a new justification and interpretation of “pluralism in economics” and discusses how it can be implemented. Calls for pluralism reflect discontent with the exclusive dominance of one approach in economics. This perceived monism entails twofold oppression of contesting theories with a legitimate claim to truth and of the academics that promote them. A doctrine of pluralism thus has to satisfy both an epistemological and a moral condition. However, the literature on pluralism in economics either overly associates pluralism with heterodox economics or fails to provide sufficient epistemological and institutional recommendations. The thesis seeks to abstract from the content of current orthodox and heterodox theory in order to give a consistent interpretation of pluralism as a stable and lasting doctrine. Firstly, given epistemic uncertainty, pluralism is required for the advancement of knowledge, the consequences of which are drawn by application of Mill’s arguments for the liberty of thought and discussion and their further development in Feyerabend’s methodological pluralism. Secondly, the doctrine must secure the right of all academics to pursue truth in the ways they deem fit. Drawing on Habermas’ theory of communicative rationality and Longino’s norms for scientific discourse, ideal conditions for pluralist scientific exchange are delineated. Reviewing sociological evidence, it is shown that there is a well-organized hierarchical system in the discipline that reinforces monism through education, journals, hiring/promotion and research funding. Given these constraints, the calls for pluralism amount to a call for liberal education reform in economics, in which the aim is to foster the intellectual development of students. Pluralism is not about accommodating a range of approaches; pluralism ensures an environment that yields academics capable of truth pursuit in a world of uncertain knowledge. However, intricate links between economics and power relations in society may inhibit its feasibility.
author Eliassen, Roman Linneberg
author_facet Eliassen, Roman Linneberg
author_sort Eliassen, Roman Linneberg
title On the liberty of thought and discussion in economics
title_short On the liberty of thought and discussion in economics
title_full On the liberty of thought and discussion in economics
title_fullStr On the liberty of thought and discussion in economics
title_full_unstemmed On the liberty of thought and discussion in economics
title_sort on the liberty of thought and discussion in economics
publisher Anglia Ruskin University
publishDate 2016
url http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.698901
work_keys_str_mv AT eliassenromanlinneberg onthelibertyofthoughtanddiscussionineconomics
_version_ 1718636322670772224