Suchergebnisse

1. What is this 'school' called neoclassical economics? / Tony Lawson -- 2. From neoclassical theory to mainstream modelling : fifty years of moral hazard in perspective / John Latsis and Constantinos Repapis -- 3. Neoclassicism, critical realism and the Cambridge methodological tradition / Sheila Dow -- 4. Lawson, Veblen and Marshall: how to read modern neoclassicism / Anne Mayhew -- 5. Lawson on Veblen on social ontology / John B. Davis -- 6. Why is this 'school' called neoclassical economics? Classicism and neoclassicism in historical context / Nuno Ornelas Martins -- 7. Ten propositions on 'neoclassical economics' / John King -- 8. Neoclassical economics : an elephant is not a chimera but is a chimera real? / Ben Fine -- 9. The state of nature and natural states : ideology and formalism in the critique of neoclassical economics / Brian O'Boyle and Terrence McDonough -- 10. Heterodox economics, social ontology and the use of mathematics / Mark Setterfield -- 11. Is neoclassical economics mathematical? Is there a non-neoclassical mathematical economics? / Steve Keen -- 12. Neoclassicism forever / Don Ross -- 13. Reflections upon neoclassical labour economics / Steve Fleetwood.

Abstract
In this review essay, I explore the first two of a planned 10 volumes of Ben Fine's selected journal publications. The two are broadly concerned with economics imperialism before and after a 'watershed' (before which it is recognised for what it is and after which it is less so). I first set out what Fine means by economics imperialism. I then discuss a few examples of what heterodox economists have been talking about insofar as they were not (quite) talking about economics imperialism. This provides a useful segue into the specifics of Fine's writings across the two volumes, and in two subsections, I separately survey the volumes. Finally, I conclude with some comment on the sense of unfinished business that hangs over constructive change.

AbstractThe subject of this special forum is contingency and the openness of the future, and in this essay we take a route not often travelled in regard of these and focus first on philosophy of time. We contrast static and dynamic theory of time in order to (eventually) acquire some traction on the meaning of both contingency and the open future. We suggest critical realism presupposes dynamic theory and that critical realism provides various conceptualizations that might contribute to dynamic theory.