Abstract
This paper responds to arguments presented by the four contributors to the symposium on The Economist's Oath, concerning the failure of the economics profession to recognize and respond appropriately to the daunting ethical questions that arise in the context of its work. The essay first explores the paternalistic sensibilities of many economists, who believe that their expertise grants them authority to decide for others. Second, the essay acknowledges the risks associated with the project to bring professional ethics into economics but expresses the hope that ethical awareness of the right sort will undermine the extraordinary hubris now on display in the profession. Third, the paper endorses assertive pluralism in economics and the view that “monotheoreticism” is cause for grave concern. Finally, the paper explores the complexity of the matter of harm as well as econogenic harm, the harm economists cause as they presumably try to do good.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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.
