Heterodoxy

Mark Thoma posts on the division between the neoclassical mafia and the Heterodox by access to a Christopher Hayes article in The Nation. He also provide access to this David Warsh article, which should also be read. Many would claim this division has origin within that which is the birth of the Economic profession, Adam Smith and his The Wealth of Nations. Others would trace the division to the Works of the Classics. I would trace the division to the work of Paul Samuelson, he of the Averaged Rational Mentality of the Economic Participant. Math models have presented immense value to Economics, but left Us with a residue of rigidity which punishes stray Thought deviating from the Mean.

Behavioral Economists try to bring Peace to the Profession, by explanatory Excuse that Variations from the Mean are necessary to composite Dr. Samuelson’s Averages in the first place. They do a good Job most often, to the point they are beginning to be disliked by both Neoclassical and Heterodox alike. George Akerlof found himself far more accurate than he even imagined, but a great deal of the ‘asymmetric information’ existed more in the training and labors of his fellow Economists, than in the Market structure which he examined. The heart of the matter resides in Economic Participation pattern reminiscent of the pattern of a Shotgun blast, with the Rationality of the Participant ranging from absolute None to genius levels of acumen. Any statistical Averaging varies by the deviant impulses of the Participant Mind, coupled by the occasional aspect of the Participation rate. The Behavioral Economists exert effort to explain this Conceptualism, but are defeated by the dedication to Consensus–both within and outside the Economic profession.

The occasional Reader of Economics should first recognize the ‘Tempest in a Teapot’ nature of the Conflict between Neoclassical and Heterodox. None of the economic models work precisely, no matter which Side has produced them; the Vision of the esteemed Dr. Paul Samuelson when he started his truly great effort. It reminds of the Communists (themselves self-considered Economists) who developed a Language understood only by themselves, without real definition of any ideology which worked; avoiding the real problem of accurate resolution of their difficulties by venue of going Political–a seeming traditional route for failed Economic values. Students must not be too Concerned, Academics in total has been a human frailty of trying to force an artificial structure unto Nature. lgl