Abstract
ABSTRACTIn the early 1970s Wilfred Beckerman and K. William Kapp engaged in a serious dispute. Although it focused on social costs, the dispute raised issues about the very foundations of economics. The differences in approach to social costs that this dispute exposed were so deep-rooted as to preclude (or at least hinder) any possibility of constructive dialogue. This article argues that the subsequent ‘conspiracy of silence’ against Kapp should be understood in terms of Kapp’s very different conception of economics as a social science. This issue is relevant to a broader discussion about the boundaries of pluralism in economics—how these boundaries are drawn and the conditions for a constructive dialogue among economists and with other social scientists.
Published Version (
Free)
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.
