What it takes​ to become a great economist

19 Feb, 2019 at 08:36 | Posted in Economics | 6 Comments

The master-economist must possess a rare combination of gifts …​ He must be mathematician, historian, statesman, philosopher—in some degree. He must understand symbols and speak in words. He must contemplate the particular, in terms of the general, and touch abstract and concrete in the same flight of thought. He must study the present in the light of the past for the purposes of the future. No part of man’s nature or his institutions must be entirely outside his regard. He must be purposeful and disinterested in a simultaneous mood, as aloof and incorruptible as an artist, yet sometimes as near to earth as a politician.

John Maynard Keynes

Economics students today are complaining more and more about the way economics is taught. The lack of fundamental diversity — not just path-dependent elaborations of the mainstream canon — and narrowing of the curriculum, dissatisfy econ students all over the world. The frustrating lack of real-world relevance has led many of them to demand the discipline to start developing a more open and pluralistic theoretical and methodological attitude.

There are many things about the way economics is taught today that worry yours truly. Today’s students are force-fed with mainstream neoclassical theories and models. That lack of pluralism is cause for serious concern.

However, I find the most salient deficiency in ‘modern’ economics education in the total absence of courses in the history of economic thought and economic methodology. That is deeply worrying since a science that doesn’t self-reflect and asks important methodological and science-theoretical questions about the own activity, is a science in dire straits.

Methodology is about how we do economics, how we evaluate theories, models and arguments. To know and think about methodology is important for every economist. Without methodological awareness it’s really impossible to understand what you are doing and why you’re doing it. Dismissing methodology is dismissing a necessary and vital part of science.

For someone who has spent forty years in economics academia, it’s hopeful to see all these young economics students that want to see a real change in economics and the way it’s taught. Never give up. Never give in.

6 Comments

  1. “No part of man’s nature or his institutions must be entirely outside his regard.”
    .
    Keynes ignores or dismisses the part of my nature that does not desire to put a bill of sale on what I have to offer. There is more to life than crass, materialistic economics.

  2. Everything Keynes said related to academic knowledge and political saviness. He made no mention about appreciation of the actual lives of real working people. It is all a completely pointless exercise without that inclusion. Of course, Keynes was a self admitted elitist, and that character describes most of our (UK) parliamentarians, commons and lords. They prefer paternalism to true democracy. And so, overwhelmingly economists are cut from the same cloth.

  3. Eminence in the field of economics — including recognition by the Nobel committee — is most reliably gained by chanting whatever neoclassical lies are most convenient to the financial interests of the privileged. The more promise a student shows of being able and willing to make economics into a genuine empirical science that seeks the truth, the less likely they are to be admitted to grad school.

  4. Without methodological awareness it’s really impossible to understand what you are doing and why you’re doing it. I
    .
    They are doing it wrong — you think they want to be aware of that? To confess it publicly?

  5. wonderfully worded, Professor. ty for sharing your thoughts…


Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Blog at WordPress.com.
Entries and Comments feeds.