Reply to Dennis Rusche's critique of "Implicit A Prioris in the Evolution of Economics: Ratzinger’s Alternative"

Hodge, Andrew and Duhs, Alan (2013) Reply to Dennis Rusche's critique of "Implicit A Prioris in the Evolution of Economics: Ratzinger’s Alternative". Journal of Economic Issues, 47 4: 1020-1031. doi:10.2753/JEI0021-3624470411


Author Hodge, Andrew
Duhs, Alan
Title Reply to Dennis Rusche's critique of "Implicit A Prioris in the Evolution of Economics: Ratzinger’s Alternative"
Journal name Journal of Economic Issues   Check publisher's open access policy
ISSN 0021-3624
1946-326X
Publication date 2013-12-05
Sub-type Discussion - responses, round table/panel discussions, Q&A, reply
DOI 10.2753/JEI0021-3624470411
Open Access Status Not Open Access
Volume 47
Issue 4
Start page 1020
End page 1031
Total pages 12
Place of publication Armonk, NY, United States
Publisher M.E. Sharpe
Collection year 2014
Language eng
Formatted abstract
Dennis Rusche offers a dismissive critique of our 2011 paper on the theme of a prioris in economics. But it is a critique in which he confuses institutionalized religion and political philosophy, and fails to make contact with our substantive theme. The importance of that theme is, in fact, inadvertently reaffirmed by Rusche’s misconceived notion that appeal may be made to John Dewey’s authority for a “scientific” standard or for “objective validity” about individual “growth” and social progress. Rather than showing that metaphysics may be dismissed as irrelevant and misguided, Rusche demonstrates that the reasons for theory selection — or, more generally, for school-of-thought selection — remain in need of greater clarification.

While our 2011 paper did not focus on Dewey, as Rusche’s comment does, we readily concede that Joseph Ratzinger’s position is at odds with Dewey’s. The issue, however, is to decide what should be made of that. Because of the stress Rusche puts on institutionalized religion, we note at the outset that, before becoming Pope, Ratzinger was an academic who held a professorial position at the University of Tubingen. He subsequently held senior academic positions at Regensburg. He has written books and peer-reviewed articles, as well as debated prominent philosophers (e.g., Jürgen Habermas).

We also acknowledge that we welcome Rusche’s engagement with our work, especially since economic philosophy continues to struggle to gain recognition in mainstream economics. It is a credit to the editors of this journal (past and present), and to the Association of Evolutionary Economics, that they are willing to encourage and facilitate an avenue for such discourse and debate. We are grateful for the opportunity to provide this response.
Q-Index Code CX
Q-Index Status Confirmed Code
Institutional Status UQ

Document type: Journal Article
Sub-type: Discussion - responses, round table/panel discussions, Q&A, reply
Collections: Non HERDC
School of Public Health Publications
School of Economics Publications
 
Versions
Version Filter Type
Citation counts: TR Web of Science Citation Count  Cited 0 times in Thomson Reuters Web of Science Article
Scopus Citation Count Cited 0 times in Scopus Article
Google Scholar Search Google Scholar
Created: Fri, 06 Dec 2013, 13:28:02 EST by Dr Andrew Hodge on behalf of School of Public Health