Reorienting Economics analyzes many important issues in the social sciences. This article focuses on Lawson’s key methodological and epistemological claims concerning the role of mathematics in social theory. Lawson provides several forceful criticisms of the search for mathematical rigor for the mere sake of formalism. Yet his stronger claims on the extremely limited, if nonexistent, scope for formal analysis in the social sciences are less convincing. In general, his purely methodological approach does not provide robust foundations for reorienting economics.
LawsonT.2004. On heterodox economics, themata, and the use of mathematics in economics. Journal of Economic Methodology11:329-40.
10.
LawsonT.2006. The nature of heterodox economics. Cambridge Journal of Economics30:483-505.
11.
LawsonT.2009a. On the nature and role of formalism in economics. In Ontology and economics: Tony Lawson and his critics, edited by FullbrookE.London: Routledge.
12.
LawsonT.2009b. The current economic crisis: Its nature and the course of academic economics. Cambridge Journal of Economics. 33:759-77.
13.
RoemerJ. E.1981. Analytical foundations of Marxian economic theory. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
14.
SchellingT.1969. Models of segregation. American Economic Review59:488-93.
15.
SenA. K.1999. The possibility of social choice. American Economic Review89:349-78.
16.
VercelliA.1991. Methodological foundations of macroeconomics: Keynes and Lucas. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
17.
WrightE. O.1989. What is analytical Marxism?Socialist Review19:35-56.
