Misconceptions within neoclassical economics and their possible causes

Abstract

In his influential book, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, Kuhn (2012 [1962]) argued that a well-established discipline of science (i.e., normal science) rejects many socially important problems as metaphysical or as concerns of another discipline, if these problems do not fit into the conceptual tools of the paradigm. Just as Kuhn argued, neoclassical economics, as an established mainstream theory, rejects theories, sometimes even whole disciplines like anthropology and ecology, if they seriously conflict with its core assumptions and beliefs. This paper summarises misconceptions within neoclassical economics and their causes such as ideological barriers (preventing a better, holistic, multidisciplinary understanding of economics) and ecological illiteracy. Within the last 20 years, and especially after the financial crash in 2008, critical-minded student and academic associations have criticised mainstream economics education, with suggestions like 'three-fold pluralism' as a general framework for improved education (e.g., Open Letter at http://www.isipe.net). Nevertheless, understanding these ideological and institutional barriers and their possible causes is essential to designing the specific content of a better economics education and to help us build sustainable communities.