Toxic Economic Textbooks
by Benjamin on May 19, 2009
The Post Autistic Economic Review – now known under the uninspiring sobriquet Real World Economic Review – is pushing a new movement against the problems of traditional textbooks in economics – Toxic Textbooks – saying they are to blame for the recent problems amongst other things.
The current economic meltdown is not the result of natural causes or human conspiracy, but because society at all levels became infected with false beliefs regarding the nature of economic reality. And the primary sources of this infection are the “neoclassical” or “mainstream” textbooks long used in introductory economics courses in universities throughout the world.
This is not a new complaint, in fact it’s been around a while, but the language has certainly gotten a lot stronger in this call for student action. Textbooks are however here to stay so this also requires academics to write ‘good’ textbooks, which is a challenge, which would avoid the problems outlined in the Toxic Textbook Manifesto.
Every year these “mainstream” books serve to indoctrinate millions of students in a quaint ideology (perfect rationality of economic agents, market efficiency, the invisible hand, etc.) cunningly disguised as science. This mass miseducation deprives society of the moral and intellectual capacities it needs in order to design and maintain the support systems required by market economies.
Tags: academia, Economics, mainstream, Textbook, Undergraduate
Yes, there is a need for real change. Whether we like it, or not a “reasonable” degree of regulation is vital.
However, there is also a need for the development of a NEW PARADIGM. Here, I would direct students, and others to my evolving project. It is called…..
TRANSFINANCIAL ECONOMICS.
Ofcourse, alot of detailed work will be needed for this project, but the basic concepts can be found at the p2pfoundation.
Intelligent comments always welcome here, or to my email address found at the bottom of the p2pfoundation entry.
Please note the link concerned is to be updated, and better edited….
R.Searle
I think one of the biggest problems is the lack of pluralism in teaching. At most universities you get a standard economics education, which means that you’ll never read Smith, Ricardo, Marx and Keynes. Most students don’t learn to think outside the mainstream paradigma.
A first step in the right direction would be to acknowledge that pluralism is inherently valueable. Of course it would be great if pluralism would be reflected in the textbooks, but this is missing the more important point, namely how textbooks are used. When I took the Advanced Micro class (with Duncan Foley at the New School) we used the books by Varian and Mas-Colell-Whinston-Green. Duncan always had a critical view of both books and emphasized their strengths and weaknesses, as well as alternative approaches about which the textbooks remained silent.
My thesis would be that it’s not the textbooks that “infect” or “indoctrinate” millions of students, but rather how they are used by most teachers!
Nice contribution, Matthias.
One step further, we could say that there’s a lack of pluralism in understanding. Economics is a tough subject, which involves tons of outside considerations.
Quite honestly, I think there’s a generation of teachers, students and resources built around several thin explanations for such a massively complex concept as economics; most of which that tie into personal job security in academic institutions. But thats just social speculation (as always).
I would agree with both points raised, that there is a lack of pluralism on the part of the teachers and on the part of the profession more widely, but I do think there is a case for looking at the textbooks, perhaps even before we address the staff… ?
We can’t expect every class to have a pluralist instructor, much like we cannot expect every class to have a purely neo-classical instructor, there will be exceptions and people with strongly held views. The question for me is how undergraduates are introduced to the subject, and what references they have for pursuing their own study and going over details after lectures / after university.
I think it would be more useful to have a pluralist economics textbook in every classroom with mainstream lecturers critiquing alternative theories, than to have mainstream textbooks which are criticised by the few pluralist teachers… It seems a better starting point both for the next generation of instructors and for the students. That’s my thoughts at least.
“it would be more useful to have a pluralist economics textbook in every classroom with mainstream lecturers critiquing alternative theories, than to have mainstream textbooks which are criticised by the few pluralist teachers”
100% agree. Give people every resource, so they can make up their own minds.
Looks like the free market of information is spamming your blog.
Most textbooks are not pluralist but focus on only one perspective. Is there any hope that there will be more pluralist textbooks in the future?
On tobacco packaging there is a warning like: “Smoking clogs the arteries and causes heart attacks.” Should there be a warning on textbooks? “This textbook provides only one possible point of view. Excessive use of it may cause serious damage to the economy.”
I’d love to see that warning label on a textbook – that would be hilarious… But then again… The text on the cigarette packages have been deemed so inefficient in the UK, and other countries, that there are now big pictures of throat cancer, black lungs and sperm cells (the last one has a bit of a mixed message I think) on top of the writing. And did it make a difference? nope.
That being said, it would be interesting to have images of failed economic reform and warning labels on textbooks… Not sure the message would come across though.
No… I still think the battle for the class-room is fought in the textbook. The battle for good economics is to be fought with good scholarship, something often lacking in the mainstream we teach out undergrads regardless.