I came across this really helpful paper on the underlying premises which are common to all neoclassical theories of economics. The authors attempt to lay bare the unquestioned assumptions, and to show why they arose, and why they are unacknowledged. In doing so they show why it is necessary to reconnect this set of axioms with a wider intellectual discourse, and also why there is fierce resistance to doing that. I think this is very well worth while reading.
www.paecon.net/PAEReview/issue38/ArnspergerVaroufakis38.htmThe paper touches on many of the things which I have been trying to think about in this section and more widely. The authors propose three fundamental assumptions which form the foundation of the neoliberal world view: what I have been calling their "theory of human nature".
1. Individualism
2. Instrumentality
3. Equilibration (which is a horrible word, but means the tendency to reach and maintain a state of equilibrium, as discussed in other threads)
In reading this paper it occurred to me that it is very useful to think about whether we actually accept those propositions as a fair description of how things work, which is the authors' point: and also to think about why they have such power in debate (which they also mention). There are clear links with the "anti philosophy" tendency so common in scientism: and also to the intrinsic necessity of some such set of assumptions if economics is to wear scientific clothes (also previously discussed)
The recognition that these positions need not be crude, and are therefore not easily displaced by simple characterisation is to me an important insight. But the circularity of the more sophisticated versions is nicely described and this paper forms a good starting point for thought
