Can neoclassical economics be social economics?

Warren Samuels

Forum for Social Economics, 1996, vol. 26, issue 1, 1-4

Abstract: The question is both intriguing and important but, it is argued, impossible of a conclusive single-clear cut answer. Much depends on the specification of each of the schools and of what economics as intellectual inquiry is all about. Among other points, it is recognized that neoclassical economics is already a form of social economics; that both forms of economics are sets of tools and stories and not Truth; that the two schools can be seen as either contradictory or supplementary; that the economy is so multifaceted as to give rise to and sustain divergent sets of tools and stories; that there is a difference between the formal content of neoclassicism and what neoclassisists accept; that both schools have to be understood within a larger context; and that neither school has a single valuation agenda.

Date: 1996
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/BF02778860 (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
Journal Article: Can neoclassical economics be social economics? (1996)
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:taf:fosoec:v:26:y:1996:i:1:p:1-4

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/RFSE20

DOI: 10.1007/BF02778860

Access Statistics for this article

Forum for Social Economics is currently edited by William Milberg, Dr Wolfram Elsner, Philip O'Hara, Cecilia Winters and Paolo Ramazzotti

More articles in Forum for Social Economics from Taylor & Francis Journals
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Chris Longhurst ().