ECN 305                                                                    `                                               Y. Ramstad
Chafee 801                                                                                                                  Spring 2006

COMPETING TRADITIONS IN ECONOMICS 

SYLLABUS

This is a course about ideas, period.  Be aware that the reading load is not light and that, including substantive take-home exams, substantial writing is required.  Furthermore, attendance is required.   Despite these realities, students in past semesters have generally found this to be an interesting course.  I am hopeful you will, too.

Overview of the course.

            Following is the description of the course as it appears in the University’s Undergraduate Bulletin:

ECN 305  Competing Traditions in Economics.

This course will provide students with an introductory exposure to the history of economic thought and to various competing schools of thought discernible in contemporary economics.  Important sources of disagreement within contemporary economics will be examined and situated in contending theoretical viewpoints developed by seminal figures. 

            As indicated by the course description, the chief purpose of this course is to provide you with an “introductory” exposure to the history of economic thought and also to various competing schools of thought within modern economics.  However, it is my strong belief that it is impossible to understand why there are competing schools of thought within economics without first grasping the contingent nature of "orthodox" economics as represented by conventional price theory.   Accordingly, as the semester unfolds, you will be taken on a guided tour aimed at (1) “freeing you up” to perceive the problematic foundations upon which the orthodox theory of market activity is erected and (2) giving you introductory exposure to the different "preconceptions" (fundamental beliefs) generating the competing traditions established by four seminal figures in the history of economics.   Thus the course has two "plot lines:" first, systematically tracing out the history of economic thought with an emphasis on the views developed by important "dissident" theorists; and, second, bringing into clear relief the problematic nature of the preconceptions (or "stylized assumptions") supporting the mainstream model of market activity.  I believe this second objective is extremely important, as most students do not fully appreciate how difficult it is to defend a "let the market work" posture without ultimately relying on those stylized assumptions—which may very well contradict "reality."

            In pursuit of the first objective, we will examine most closely four “schools of thought discernible in contemporary economics” and link each to its antecedent “seminal figure(s).”  Those four schools are the “neoclassical,” the “neo-Marxian,” the “Institutional,” and the “Post Keynesian.”  We will take some care to show how each school manifests “principles” established by its particular “pioneer(s) of insight”—respectively, Smith (and Walras), Marx, Veblen (and Commons), and Keynes.  Over the course of the semester, we will devote our Monday and Wednesday classes to this objective.  Understand that lectures devoted to the views of these "giants" in the history of economics will provide organization for the material found in your assigned reading—and, it is to be hoped, insight into the content of that reading as well.

            We will devote our Friday classes to our pursuit of the second objective.  I want to say more about why I believe this to be an important undertaking.   It is widely recognized that economic theories and models do not stand alone but are supported and legitimated (1) by a “substructure” of interrelated preconceptions about the nature of man and the nature of economic life, (2) by interrelated epistemo-logical and methodological beliefs, and (3) by value premises about what is significant.  As the semester proceeds, I want to bring to your conscious awareness the greatly different substructures underlying the four “traditions” that we will examine closely.   It is here that we will discover the origin of “important sources of disagreement” evident in the four “competing traditions” we will examine most closely.

            It has been my experience that before one’s mind can open to new possibilities, the "irritation of doubt" (John Dewey’s term) must creep into one's mind.  That is, one has to perceive that one’s present presumptions are not as plausible as one has thought.  In some ways, most likely, you have been "conditioned" by your experience in previous economics classes and, indeed even more importantly, by your cultural experiences.  Hence my task can be equated with that of "deprogramming" you.  Accordingly, we will devote our Friday classes over the course of the semester to “deconstructing” and critically examining key facets of the standpoint known as “mainstream” or “neoclassical” economics.  By the end of the semester you should have a good understanding of the problematic—or at least contingent—scientific status of that body of thought.  You should understand, however, that in and of itself this is not equivalent to saying that neoclassical economics is “wrong” or that an alternative perspective is "right."

            You should be forewarned that this course entails a heavy reading load, and for most undergraduates (indeed, even for most “mature” readers) the material to be read can at times be difficult to comprehend.  This does not mean that it is difficult to do well in the course.  In fact, the course is structured so that it is next to impossible for the steady worker to get a “nonproductive” grade.  Still, you should make every effort to organize your semester in such fashion that you have the time needed to read and, equally important, to reflect upon the substantial body of challenging material covered in this course.

Required books.

 1.   Robert L. Heilbroner, The Worldly Philosophers, Barnes & Noble.  (paper)

2.   William J. Barber.  A History of Economic Thought.  Penguin.  (paper)  (NOTE:  This book is out of print, so photocopies of its chapters will be provided to you.)

3.   Robert Heilbroner, ed., The Essential Adam Smith.  Norton.  (paper)

4.   Lawrence H. Simon, ed.  Selected Writings by Karl Marx.  Hackett Publ. Co.  (paper)

5.   Thorstein Veblen, The Theory of the Leisure Class.  Penguin. (paper)

 Recommended to the serious student.

1.   John Maynard Keynes, The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money.  Harcourt Brace Jovanovich. (paper)

 Additional reading.

 All additional readings assigned in the course will be photocopied and distributed on a timely basis to members of the class.   You are required to pay a fee of $17.50 for photocopied materials provided to you in this class.  During the second or third week of the course you will be instructed where to go to make this payment.

 Course requirements.

            There will be a quiz on Heilbroner’s Worldly Philosophers, a take-home midterm exam, and a comprehensive take-home final.  In addition, two “in-semester” papers (four to five pages each), a course paper (six to ten pages), and short weekly writing assignments are required.  As previously state,  class attendance is also required.   Please note that class is cancelled on Friday, March 3 (when I will be in Philadelphia for an A-10 FAR conference) and March 10 (a head start on Spring Break).  

Heilbroner quiz.  The Heilbroner quiz is scheduled for Monday, February 6.

            Exams.   Please note that the take-home midterm will be due on April 1.  The take-home final will be due at the end of the exam period scheduled for section 2 of this course by the Registrar (specific date and time to be provided later).

             Course papers.  Assignments and due dates are attached.  More detailed instructions in regard to the papers will be distributed by mid-February.           

            Short writing assignments.   During my years of teaching I have discovered, alas, that few students can be relied upon to complete assigned reading on a timely basis or to read assignments with a genuine effort to comprehend the material unless explicit consequences for not doing so are introduced into the course.  That is why I have incorporated this component into the course.  As noted previously, we will be devoting our Friday classes to deconstructing and critically examining several central elements of the "orthodox" or, as economists refer to it, the “neoclassical” standpoint. (It is important to understand that this interpretation of economic life is central to the advocacy of free markets.)  Each week you are asked to prepare for the Friday class by reading an assigned article to be distributed in class the previous Monday or Wednesday.  There will be a total of twelve (12) “Friday articles” assigned.  To make sure you read each assignment, and to help you develop the important ability of being able to distill complex information into a short summary statement, I am requiring that you submit a written summary of each assigned article.  More specifically, for each Friday assignment you will be required to write a ten to twenty word sentence summarizing the main point, or central “message,” conveyed via the assigned reading.  You are to add to that sentence a short—between 50-75 words—summary of the principal contentions forwarded in support of the central point

             Since the purpose of having you prepare the weekly writing assignments is to ensure that all members of the class have read and given some thought to the content of the assigned readings prior to coming to class, it only makes sense to limit credit to submissions made at the beginning of the class meeting when the assigned reading is to be discussed.  Accordingly, be aware that a weekly writing assignment must be submitted at the beginning of class on the date it is due to be accepted.   If you do not attend class on a particular day when a weekly writing assignment is due, make sure to arrange for another class member to submit your assignment at the beginning of class or, alternatively, to put it in my mailbox in the Economics Department office prior to class (I will check my mailbox on the way to class).  I will not accept electronic submissions of the weekly articles.  (You may have heard that I was a little lax with respect to weekly submission this past spring; please understand that this will not be the case this year.)  Additional information about the format to be used for weekly writing assignments will be provided at the time the first assignment is returned.

             Those submissions that correctly identify the main point and indicate an awareness of important supporting contentions, will be marked “1”.  Those that are on the right track but somewhat off target will be marked with a “2.”  Those that are widely off the target (not on the right track) will be marked with a “3”.   You must stay within the prescribed word count on these assignments, as submissions clearly short of or in excess of the prescribed word count will not be awarded a “1” or a “2”.   If you do not receive a “1” or a “2,” you will be instructed to rework the assignment and resubmit it the next Friday.  You can do this until you receive one of these marks.  If you receive a “1” or a “2” on ten (11) of the twelve (12) weekly short writing assignments you are required to submit, you will be awarded a “B” for that segment of the course; if you additionally receive a “1” on at least six (6) of the assignments, you will be awarded an “A.”  If you receive a “1” or a “2” on nine (9) or ten (10) assignments, you will receive a “C;” if you additionally receive a “1” on four (4) assignments, you will receive a B; if you receive a “1” or a “2” on at least seven (7) but not (9) assignments, you will receive a “D” for this component of the course; less than that and you will receive an “F.”

             I hope that you will see these weekly assignments more as an opportunity than a burden—in particular, as an opportunity to improve your thinking and writing skills.  Students often tell me, "I understand the material but I'm having trouble putting it into words."  That's nonsense.  If you can't express something through the written English language, you simply don't understand it.  Hence, writing will improve your thinking.  In addition, good writing is an important skill.  Like other skills, repeated practice at writing is the only way to improve.  If you have doubts about your ability to do college level writing, I urge you to contact the Writing Center and make a weekly appointment centered on these assignments.  Faculty have been told by the director of the Writing Center that these sorts of ongoing assignments provide the best context for fruitful assistance.

Attendance.  You are allowed two "free" absences.  Additional absences not related to verifiable illness or participation in athletic events (or analogous university activities) will result in your grade being progressively lowered below what is warranted by the weighting specified below under “course grade.”   “I am meeting with my advisor,” "I have to go to court," "My car broke down," “I have a dentist appointment,” "I have to go home for a family problem," and so on, are not acceptable excuses for missing class (however, they are perfectly good reasons for taking a “free” absence).  What I am trying to get across here is that if you are likely to have problems—whether situational or motivational—attending this class with great regularity, you should drop it now.

 Course grade.

            Your course grade will be calculated using the following weighting:

                        Heilbroner quiz                        10%

Take-home midterm                15%

                        Take-home final                      20%    

First in-semester paper             10%

                        Second in-semester paper        15%

                        Course paper                           20%

                        Short writing assignments        15%

             You will notice these weightings add up to 105%.  When I calculate your grade, I will reduce the weighting by 5% for your lowest component other than the Heilbroner quiz.

             If you are near a cutoff for a higher grade, I will use your attendance and weekly assignments to guide me.  If you have not helped yourself by attending to these “effort” components of the course, you cannot expect to get help from me.

Handouts.

             In-class handouts are an integral feature of this class.  I tend to be rather disorganized in filing materials already distributed and often misplace them, leave them at home, etc.  Hence, there may be no convenient second chance to get a specific handout.  You are strongly advised to arrange for someone else in the class to obtain a copy of a handout if you should have to miss class.  Please adopt a "buddy system" for that purpose.

 Class participation.

             This is primarily a lecture course.  Class participation will not be a factor in your grade.  All the same, I strongly urge you to participate in class by asking questions, answering questions posed to the class, and, when appropriate, challenging points made by me or other members of the class.

 Original source reading.

             In order to develop an accurate sense of a particular writer, there is no substitute for reading the original work.  That is why a substantial amount of original source material is made part of your assigned reading for this course.  You will be expected to show in your in-semester papers that you are familiar with the content of the original source reading.

Topic Outline

 Provided below is a topic outline for the semester.  You should regard the topic outline as a rough guide subject to revision.  In truth, it is impossible for me to anticipate exactly how long we will spend on any one topic; hence I will announce in class when we are moving from one topic to the next    You can pace yourself within a topic area and spread the assigned reading over the entire period we spend on it.  Please understand that it is possible one or more topics will be skipped over if we get pressed for time, which is a virtual certainty given that the spring semester has been shortened a week in comparison to previous years.. 

Topic                                                                        Reading

 Overview of course &                                                 Heilbroner, TWP, Entire Book

Background Issues                                          Barber:  Prologue and Introduction (handout)

Adam Smith                                                     Barber:  Ch. 1 (handout)

Heilbroner:  TMS, Part 1:  I, 1 (first few pages), skim 2-  

5; skim II; skim III 1-2, read 3; Part 2 , skim; Part 3, skim 1-2, read 3, skim 4-6; Part 4, read 1, skim 2; skim Part 5 and Part 6.  WON, Book I, 1—8, 10 (Part I only); Book II, 1-5;  Book III, 1

Thomas Malthus & David Ricardo                      Barber:  Chs. 2 & 3 (handouts)

John Stuart Mill                                                  Barber:  Ch. 4 (handout)

Karl Marx                                                        Barber:  Ch. 5 (handout)

Simon, Selected Writings

    Part I:   read extensively from pp. 58-79, 98

    Part II:  read extensively from pp. 102-186

    Part III: skim all chapters, read when topic interests you

    Part IV: read pp. 315-332                                                     

Alfred Marshall & Leon Walras                                   Barber:  Chs. 6 & 7 (handouts)

The American Institutionalists                        

Thorstein Veblen                                 Veblen, “Why Is Economics Not An Evolutionary Science” (handout)

McFarland, “Basic Veblen” (handout)

Veblen, Theory of the Leisure Class (go at least through  Chapter10)                                                                     

John R. Commons                               Commons, “Institutional Economics” (handout)

Ramstad, “The Institutionalism of John R. Commons:

Theoretical Foundations of a Volitional Economics." (handout)

John Maynard Keynes                                     Barber:  Ch. 8 (handout)

                                                                        Togati, “Keynes as the Einstein of Economic Theory”

                                                                           (handout)

                                                                        Keynes, Chs. 1, 3, 12, 18, 24 (handout)

Neo-Institutionalism: Munkirs' CPSP               No assignment

Neo-Institutionalism:  Reasonable Value                     Reading:  Ramstad, "Free Trade versus Fair Trade" (handout)

Neo-Marxism:  Social Structures of                 No assignment

   Accumulation  

Post-Keynesianism                                          Reading:  Davidson, "Controversies in Post-

                                                                           Keynesian Economics" (handout)

Wrap up                                                           Nelson, “(Preface to) Economics as Religion”)                      

Re:  the primary source reading   

 My purpose in assigning the primary source reading is to afford you with an opportunity to experience first-hand what the four giants in economic thought actually wrote.  No one could fully comprehend from a quick reading what you are being asked to read.  If something is a little confusing to you, read on.  Get a feel for what the author is trying to accomplish and the point of view being developed.  During lectures, I will identify and try to clarify (present at an appropriate level of sophistication) what in my view are some of the important ideas and contentions you should be grasping.

Readings for Weekly Short Writing Assignments*

Fri., Jan. 27                             Robinson, "Metaphysics, Morals, and Science"

Fri., Feb. 3                               Miller, “In Order to Save the World for Human Habitation, We

                                                    Must Stop Teaching Economics!”

Fri., Feb. 10                             No assignment.

Fri., Feb. 17                             Eichner, “Can Economics Become a Science?”

Fri., Feb. 24                             Simon, “The Failure of Armchair Economics” (also read the

                                                   attached article, “Rethinking Thinking”)

Mon., Mar. 6**                       Galbraith, “Power and the Useful Economist”

Fri., Mar. 10                            No assignment.  Class cancelled.

Fri., Mar. 24                            Thompson, “Introduction to Microeconomics: Scope & Method of

                                                    Analysis”

Fri., Mar. 31                            Hunt, “Economic Scholasticism and Capitalist Ideology”

Fri., Apr. 7                              Benton, “Economics and the Loss of Meaning”

Fri., Apr. 14                            Weisskopf, “The Image of Man in Economics”

Fri., Apr. 21                            Polanyi, “Our Obsolete Market Mentality”

Fri., Apr. 28                            Benicourt, “Five Pieces of Advice for Students Studying

                                                   Microeconomics”

    * Order subject to change.

** Class cancelled on March 3
 

Paper Topics and due dates 

FIRST IN-SEMESTER PAPER  (1200-1500 words; due by 4 p.m., Wednesday, March 8)

 It is often argued that the roots of "neoclassical" economics can be found in Adam Smith's writings.  Write an essay in which you assess the accuracy of this interpretation of Smith's standpoint.

 SECOND IN-SEMESTER PAPER (1500-2000 words; due by 4 p.m., Wednesday, April 19)

             Marx is usually understood to have been a profoundly "radical" thinker.  It has been argued by many scholars, however, that Veblen must be understood as an even more radical thinker.  Write an essay in which you assess the accuracy of this interpretation of Veblen's thought.

 COURSE PAPER (2000-3000 words; due 4 p.m., Tuesday, May 1)

             V. I. Lenin once declared that "Professors of economics are nothing more than scientific salesmen of the capitalist class."  Lenin was here making the charge that economics is not an objective science explaining how the world actually works but is instead an ideology "selling" capitalism to the population at large (by making it appear "natural" and "good").  For the purpose of this assignment, assume that, while not hostile to it, I am unconvinced that Lenin's accusation is accurate.  Your task is to use the primary and secondary readings assigned in this course and the material covered in lectures to construct as strong a case as possible that modern 'orthodox' economics is not 'science' and in fact provides us with an infelicitous (def: not appropriate in application) understanding of economic life.  Be comprehensive in your inclusion of material as broad ranging as the course material allows.

 Note:  I want to emphasize that these papers will not be as difficult to write as it might appear at the beginning of the course.  Indeed, you will find that we will cover everything you need as "raw material" for your essays.  My hope is that much of the course information will "solidify" in your mind as a consequence of these assignments.  Have fun!

Instructions for Course Papers

Note:  If it is obvious from your paper that you have not carefully read these instructions, your essay will be marked down a full letter grade.

General instructions.

            Identification.  You are not to put your name anywhere on your paper.  For identification purposes, put your student ID number (not your SS number) in the upper left-hand corner of the first page.  Make sure your pages are stapled together.

            Format.  The essays must be typed.  Please double space. Number your pages, beginning with page 2.  Write the number of words in your essay in the top right hand corner of the first page (word processing software generally has a command allowing for a word count).  If you go more than a hundred words or so over the maximum word count, I will adjust your grade downward in proportion to your "excess verbiage."  If you are substantially short of the minimum word count, inadequacies/omissions will be penalized more heavily than when they are found in a submission of the specified length.  Do not provide a cover sheet, and do not encase your submission in any type of binder. 

            Citations.  (Note:  "Citations" refers to the providing of footnotes, endnotes, or other conventional methods of providing references to another writer's/speaker's work.)  The writing assignments in this class may differ somewhat from many of the other writing experiences you may have had while at URI in that here your work is expected not only to be literate but also 'scholarly."  This means it must be properly documented.  In other words, you must support your summary and analysis of a writer's views, to the extent it is possible to do so, with specific references to the passages actually written by the writer in question (this is referred to as "primary source documentation") and by referring to the interpretations and conclusions of "authorities" found in the assigned readings and in your lecture notes (this is referred to as "secondary source documentation").  Understand that primary source documentation is always considered more compelling that secondary source documentation.  Be especially aware that your unsupported “opinions” are not being sought.  What is being sought are conclusions supported by analysis and authority.

 I expect you to provide extensive citations.  Be aware that citations are appropriate in at least three general cases:  (1) whenever you directly quote or paraphrase someone (such as Adam Smith); (2) whenever you are attributing a view to someone (such as Adam Smith) that is not “widely known”  (see Section 8.27.12 from the University Manual, which is reproduced below); and (3) whenever the "expert opinion" of an "authority" (such as Ramstad) is relied upon.

 Perhaps some clarification will be helpful.  You are probably used to the idea that it is necessary to provide a citation whenever you quote or paraphrase words spoken or written by another person.  In scholarly work, it is considered "good scholarship" also to provide a citation whenever you attribute a “controversial” or a “not-widely-known” viewpoint to someone.  This way you provide the reader with sufficient information, if s/he is so inclined, to look up for her/himself whether you have accurately characterized the attributed viewpoint.  Again, this is a requisite of good scholarship.

 In developing your arguments, you always strengthen your case by showing that a particular interpretation/conclusion is corroborated by an "authority."  For this type of attribution, too, you must indicate in a citation where the reader can read for him/herself what the "authority" actually may have said.  This is also considered to be good scholarship.  In using class notes for this purpose, always indicate the date you "recorded" the statement in question.

 To be sure, it is not always easy to decide whether a citation is appropriate.  In preparing your course paper, I advise you to err on the side of caution.  In other words, if there's doubt in your mind, provide a citation.  It will be helpful for you to consider me a "nut" about documentation; I'll take no offense at this characterization.  For the sort of work you have been assigned, I consider 30 to 50 citations for a 2000-word paper to be "normal."

 You are required to use a standard format for your citations (there are several formats that are widely used).  You are advised to consult a writing manual for further guidance.  A submission with improperly formatted citations will be marked down one full letter grade.

             Primary-source documentation.  I expect you to make a good effort to complete the assigned reading.  To maximize the pressure upon you to actually read a good portion of what is assigned, I place great emphasis in evaluating your paper on whether you have included appropriate "primary source" documentation.  This means supporting your assertions, whenever possible (see the section headed ATTENTION! below), with references to passages from the original source.  In other words, when you make a claim that Adam Smith takes a particular position or holds a particular view, I will always look to see whether you provide a citation to Smith's own writings to support your assertion (assuming that view is in fact expressed in the assigned abridgment of Smith's works).  The same will be true for Marx, Veblen, and Keynes.  Again, I place great emphasis in evaluating your papers on primary source documentation.  Be forewarned.

             The envisioned reader.  In writing your papers, do not have me in mind as your reader.  Instead, pretend that the reader is, say, an English professor, one who might be interested in the topic yet has no real familiarity with the material you discuss in your paper.  In other words, I am not going to read between the lines and say to myself, "Oh, s/he knew that."  Only what you actually write will be used to determine your grade.  Also note that this hypothetical "intelligent reader" has no idea about the assignment to which your paper is the response.  Hence it is up to you to provide an introduction that identifies what you are going to do in the paper and that simultaneously motivates the reader to continue reading (that is, your introduction should be designed to capture the reader's interest).

             Correct Answers?  Your grade will NOT depend upon whether your conclusion/analysis happens to match mine.  What it will depend upon is the accuracy and adequacy of the information you provide and the coherence of the argument/analysis you develop in support of your contentions.

             The papers are to be individual work.  You are encouraged to discuss your ideas with other class members and me.  I also recommend, if you are not confident about your basic writing skills, that you get help from the Writing Center in Independence Hall.  However, I want to emphasize that even though you are encouraged to seek appropriate assistance from the Writing lab and to discuss you ideas with others, this does not alter the fact that your papers are to be written solely by you.  You are not allowed to write them in cooperation with a classmate or any other person.  Once your paper is written, you should have someone competent proofread it to assist you in eliminating errors.

             ATTENTION!          You should be aware that, due to sad experience, prevention of unauthorized assistance and plagiarism is a major preoccupation of mine in this course.  The following is taken from the University Manual:

 8.27.10  Cheating and Plagiarism.  Students are expected to be honest in all academic work.  Cheating is the claiming of credit for work not done independently without giving credit for aid received, or any unauthorized communication during examinations.

8.27.11   A student's name (in this case, I.D. number—see below) on any written exercise (theme, report, notebook, paper, examination) shall be regarded as assurance that the work is the result of the student's own thought and study, stated in the student's own words and produced without assistance, except as quotation marks, references and footnotes acknowledge the use of other sources of assistance.

8.27.12  In preparing papers or themes, a student often needs or is required to employ sources of information or opinion.  All such sources used in preparing to write or in writing a paper shall be listed in the bibliography.  It is not necessary to give footnote reference for specific facts which are common knowledge and have obtained general agreement.     

In an effort to control problems associated with unauthorized assistance and plagiarism, I am requiring that you limit your sources to the books and articles assigned on the course syllabus, plus class notes from this semester.  This means you cannot use material found on the internet.  Be aware that only the editions of books listed on the course syllabus satisfy the requirement "made available to you in this course." Also be aware that I will be using search engine technology made available to URI faculty to check whether your paper has been plagiarized via the internet.  Evidence that the paper has been written by someone else, as well as evidence of plagiarism by you, will result in a "zero" grade on the assignment and the initiation of appropriate disciplinary procedures  (a zero is a much lower grade than an “F”).  If I cannot track down clear evidence of plagiarism, yet find that your paper incorporates material not made available to you in this course this semester, it will be returned ungraded.