 ConclusionJ. E. King
Chapter 11 in Economic Exiles, 1988, pp 234-242 from Palgrave Macmillan Abstract: Abstract In the opening chapter it was suggested that economic heresy can be interpreted as deviant science. The literature on the sociology of science yielded a number of hypotheses concerning both resistance to unorthodox ideas and those occasions on which mainstream economists became more receptive to dissident arguments. Heretics might be opposed on grounds of scientific rigour, their arguments being seen as incoherent, unclear, or irrelevant to the tasks at hand. Considerations of professional pride might be involved, both in the cases of ‘trespassers’ from another scientific discipline and where untrained amateurs are involved. Intellectual conservatism may predispose the practitioners of Kuhnian ‘normal science’ to resist innovation, and to do so more vigorously the greater the depth and breadth of the challenge to existing orthodoxy. Finally, political motives might operate if new ideas were seen to threaten existing power structures and vested (especially class) interests. Keywords: Mainstream Economist; Political Motive; Dissident Argument; Exist Power Structure; Opening Chapter (search for similar items in EconPapers) There are no downloads for this item, see the EconPapers FAQ for hints about obtaining it. Related works: Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:pal:palchp:978-1-349-07743-4_11 Ordering information: This item can be ordered from DOI: 10.1007/978-1-349-07743-4_11 Access Statistics for this chapter More chapters in Palgrave Macmillan Books from Palgrave Macmillan |
Is your work missing from RePEc? Here is how to contribute.
Questions or problems? Check the EconPapers FAQ or send mail to .
EconPapers is hosted by the
School of Business at Örebro University.