ABSTRACT
In this chapter, it is argued that pluralism appears as a workable solution to avoid the threat to economics posed by the near monopoly of an economic theory divorced from reality and real-world problems.
Different arguments are offered to explain the need for pluralism in economics.
It is remarked that economics is a social science, not an exact science. Therefore, there have always been different schools of thought which is inevitable in any social science for different reasons, not least the influence of the personal or group’s weltanschauungen.
While neoclassical economics enjoys the advantage of being more or less monolithic, heterodox economics lacks a unified theoretical hard core. For this reason, pluralism is also a necessary condition to unify heterodoxy through debate and competition not only against orthodoxy but also between its different versions.
The quest for a more realistic theory has imposed the flexibilization of neoclassical theory via the method of axiomatic variation but this does not mean that mainstream economics has become pluralist. In any case, mainstream economics tolerates competing theories as long as they respect its methodological core. As Dow (2014: 1) points out, “while there is a variety of theories within mainstream economics, nevertheless they are all conditioned by the shared ontology, epistemology and methodology by which mainstream economics is defined.”
Given the abnormal situation in economics – a discipline that is dominated by one research program which considers itself the only one to be considered “scientific” in spite of its recurrent failures – a positive discrimination policy seems necessary to implement in universities and economic journals to help in breaking up that monopoly.
