Disciplinary Division within Social Sciences: Methodological Issues in Economic Imperialism and Economic Pluralism

Fernando Chafim ()
Additional contact information
Fernando Chafim: Institute of Economics, University of Campinas

History of Economic Ideas, 2016, vol. 24, issue 3, 145-164

Abstract: This paper attempts to shed light on the problematic nature of the ongoing disciplinary division within social sciences. Disciplinary barriers between social disciplines are nonetheless repeatedly challenged by attempts to cross boundaries and hybridization processes. In economics, we can detect two distinct methodological practices – an imperialistic one and a pluralistic one. The former aims at interdisciplinarity in a limited range of hybridization. The latter supports more possibilities, feasible with the evolution of disciplines, but it remains largely mono-disciplinary. In this respect the aims of this paper are twofold: (1) to show that, unlike natural sciences, there are no ontological reasons for disciplinary divisions in the social sciences; and (2) to outline some implications of all this, by contrasting the pluralism project in heterodox economics and the parochial methodology of economic imperialism.

Date: 2016
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (3)

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.libraweb.net/articoli.php?chiave=201606103&rivista=61
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:hid:journl:v:24:y:2016:3:7:p:145-164

Access Statistics for this article

History of Economic Ideas is currently edited by Riccardo Faucci, Nicola Giocoli, Roberto Marchionatti

More articles in History of Economic Ideas from Fabrizio Serra Editore, Pisa - Roma
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Mario Aldo Cedrini ().