Pluralism in economics and the place of pluralism in Turkish economic thought

The theories, models, methods, and assumptions used in economics are continually criticized, especially during crises, as unrealistic and unsuccessful in explaining economic phenomena and economic reality. This situation has been called "the crisis of economics," although Marxists and other heterodox economists refer to it as "the crisis of mainstream economics," believing their interpretations better explain phenomena than those of orthodox economists. Economics has always encompassed the plurality of interpretation. For instance, Neoclassical, Keynesian, and Marxist economists offer different interpretations of unemployment, just as Mercantilists and Physiocrats offer alternative explanations for the wealth of nations. Nonetheless, the diverse theories, methods, and models that constitute plurality in economic thought do not coexist as equals. For example, Neoclassical economics dominates heterodox approaches among university departments of economics. Consequently, discussions about pluralism in economics occur independent of plurality in economics. Genuine pluralism in economics means defending the possible validity of different methods, theories, and models in approaching similar phenomenon. This thesis "Pluralism in Economics and the Place of Pluralism in Turkish Economic Thought" argues that pluralism contributes to explaining economic phenomena. It addresses such questions as how to understand economic models, methods, and assumptions and how to determine those that are unrealistic. It asserts that academic curricula that embody pluralism prepare more successful economists. More comprehensive explanations and understanding of economic phenomena are possible when alternative and rival approaches are encouraged to exist in an equal conditions. This study consists of four main sections: (1) Plurality in Economics and Pluralism, (2) The Explanatory Power of Economics and Pluralism, (3) Economic Education and Pluralism, and (4) The Place of Pluralism in Turkish Economic Thought. The first section defines plurality in economics and gives examples from the history of economic thought to the present. Similar or identical phenomena have been explained in very different forms by Mercantilists, Physiocrats, Classicists, and Marxists. These differences in economic thought extend into the present as a division between orthodoxy and heterodoxy. Even though the orthodox/heterodox distinction is useful in explaining methodological differences between schools, and which school is dominant in economic education, it is insufficient to capture the diversity of modern economics. This section defines pluralism and methodological pluralism and reviews the literature of pluralism in economics. The second section of the thesis assesses the relationship among economic explanations and methods, models, and assumptions. It analyzes the concept of an explanation under the categories of explanandum, explanans as well as complementary and rival explanations. Each method and model tries to explain economic phenomena within the framework of its assumptions. Their differing methods and theoretical models initially seem to be in conflict, but when examined carefully their alternative explanations of economic phenomena often complete each other. Thus, exploring the different methodological approaches that constitute pluralism enhances economists' ability to explain an economy by permitting access to concepts that compete with and complement each other. As its title suggests, the third section of the thesis evaluates Economic Education and Pluralism. The curricula of undergraduate, graduate, and doctoral programs guide students and influence the kind of economists they become. A pluralist curriculum that transmits alternative theories and methods increases the capacities of practicing economists and economics students to understand, criticize, analyze, and compare economic phenomena and their interpretations. The fourth section presents and evaluates the results of surveys and interviews with M.A. and Ph.D. students in economics. It uncovers the current state of pluralism in Turkish economic thought and education. This section examines xii graduate economic education in Turkey, forming a benchmark of students' expectations, opinions, and perceptions of economics, economics education, and pluralism in economics. Results indicate that 85% of respondents and interviewees believe that more comprehensive understanding arises from examining economic subjects and issues from both mainstream and heterodox approaches. The survey asks students what qualities are required for success in economics, and their most frequent answers were "Being capable of solving problems" and "Being very good at mathematics." Respondents indicated that "having an economics undergraduate background" contributes the least to success in a graduate program