Rhetorical Dualism and the Orthodox/Heterdox Distinction in Economics

This paper attempts to combine elements of the approaches of two influential economists, Sheila Dow and Deirdre McCloskey and expands on previous work (2005) on Dow’s concept of dualism. A concept of rhetorical dualism is developed: dualism (defined variously) engaged in for a rhetorical purpose. It is argued by way of example case studies that rhetorical dualism is a significant feature of economics and that several influential authors have engaged in it. Further rhetorical dualism is shown to be prevalent in the current orthodox/heterodox distinction, and in the arguments of heterodox economists; but also that this distinction and type of distinction are unhelpful.Rhetoric; dualism; heterodox economics

Protagonists of Production in Preindustrial European Literature (1700-1800)

What form did the portrayal of business owners, entrepreneurs, peasants, craftspeople and similar ‘protagonists of production’ take before it became the subject of negative assessments in the epoch of industrialization? Focusing on the European Enlightenment movement with a special emphasis on Spain, this volume sheds light on how both male and female figures working in production are represented by novels, plays, economic tracts and in the press. Literary scholars, historians, and economists analyse how those portrayals are related to the history of economic thought, 18th-century economic discourse, and enlightened Political Economy. With an epilogue by Deirdre McCloskey

What’s Wrong with McCloskey on the Earth Charter

This note responds to Deirdre McCloskey's 2002 critique of the Earth Charter by arguing that the concepts of sustainability, intergenerational equity and political democracy are essential to an understanding of that international manifesto.

The quest for a prime mover: a critique of Deirdre McCloskey's theory of change

Within a framework of history of political thought, this essay examines the original, albeit questionable, account furthered by Chicago economist Deirdre McCloskey. First, I will present an intellectual profile of the author in order to provide a broader perspective on her thoughts about ethics, politics and economics, and to show how her position in these areas intertwines with the main thesis expressed in the Bourgeois trilogy. Secondly, I will propose, on the basis of an alternative reading of historical materialism, that Marx’s theory of change is more complex than she admits. Finally, I will show the problematic aspects of McCloskey’s theory of historical change. My main point is that McCloskey’s account is motivated by her polemic intent against Marxism –as her intellectual background shows –and because of that she ignores alternative readings of historical materialism. As a consequence, her theory of historical change presents a few flaws. In fact, the “revolution of ideas” which McCloskey indicates as a direct cause of the Industrial Revolution, may appear as an attempt to replace the accumulation theory of the Marxist tradition with another all-purpose label. It is risky to rely on a theory that seeks a single cause for historical change, because it entails a linear conception of history rather than a more complex and comprehensive one. In short, I maintain that strict causal monism cannot explain the evolution of society

“A Dialogue on Market Innovation and Laissez Faire”

A dialogue on laissez faire capitalism and the free market

Introduction to Symposium on Assist the Everyman

This is an introduction to the 6 paper symposium on "Assist the Everyman" that appears in this issue. The primary article by Daniel B. Klein is followed by comments by Gordon Tullock, Deirdre McCloskey, Israel M. Kirzner, C.A.E. Goodhart, Robert H. Frank and James K. Galbraith and a rejoinder by Daniel B. Klein.Economists

Other Things Equal: The Insanity of Letters of Recommendation

In this column, Deirdre McCloskey argues that the practice of letters of recommendation is insane. The only correct procedure for assessing scholarship in hiring or promotion is for the responsible body to read the candidate's work and discuss its intellectual quality with immediate colleagues, in a context of believably disinterested assessments from the outside.Economics

Sound and Fury: McCloskey and Significance Testing in Economics

For about twenty years, Deidre McCloskey has campaigned to convince the economics profession that it is hopelessly confused about statistical significance. She argues that many practices associated with significance testing are bad science and that most economists routinely employ these bad practices: “Though to a child they look like science, with all that really hard math, no science is being done in these and 96 percent of the best empirical economics. . .” (McCloskey 1999). McCloskey’s charges are analyzed and rejected. That statistical significance is not economic significance is a jejune and uncontroversial claim, and there is no convincing evidence that economists systematically mistake the two. Other elements of McCloskey’s analysis of statistical significance are shown to be ill-founded, and her criticisms of practices of economists are found to be based in inaccurate readings and tendentious interpretations of their work. Properly used, significance tests are a valuable tool for assessing signal strength, for assisting in model specification, and for determining causal structure.statistical significance, economic significance, significance testing, regression analysis, econometric methodology, Deirdre McCloskey, Neyman-Pearson testing