The logical flaws of neoclassical economics and why we should not teach it

Louis-Philippe Rochon and Sergio Rossi
Additional contact information
Louis-Philippe Rochon: N/A
Sergio Rossi: N/A

Advances in Economics Education, 2026, vol. 5, issue 1, 1-13

Abstract: For decades, post-Keynesians and other heterodox scholars have repeatedly and strongly argued that neoclassical economics was logically and theoretically flawed, that it was ‘wrong’ (King 2013), and that it was, following Keynes, ‘misleading and disastrous’ if we taught it to students. Some attacked its many assumptions, others its methodological weaknesses; others still its neglect of institutional, historical, political, and social factors, focusing too heavily on static, mathematical models. This paper makes the case that given the flawed nature of neoclassical theory, we should not teach it to undergraduates and instead make them stronger in data and empirical analysis to make them better job candidates.

Keywords: Endogenous money; Heterodox economics; Inflation; Macroeconomics; Neoclassical economics (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: A22 B22 B50 E12 E13 E42 E64 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2026
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.elgaronline.com/view/journals/aee/5/1/article-p1.xml (application/pdf)
Restricted Access

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:elg:aeejrn:v:5:y:2026:i:1:p1-13

Access Statistics for this article

Advances in Economics Education is currently edited by Peter Docherty

More articles in Advances in Economics Education from Edward Elgar Publishing
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Jack Sweeney ().