Abstract
Lawson (2005) attempts to distinguish between heterodox and mainstream approaches in terms of their ontological presuppositions. By contrast he claims that different heterodox approaches are characterized not by their fundamental ontological presuppositions but more superficially by different ‘concerns or questions of interest’. First I argue here that this proposed distinction between heterodox and mainstream approaches is unconvincing. Second, I propose that the ontological communality claimed by Lawson for heterodoxy ignores the specific ontological outlook of a ‘Veblenian’ branch of institutional and evolutionary economics that focuses on algorithms and rule systems.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
