References
Ackerman, F. (2002); “Still dead after all these years: Interpreting the Failure of General Equilibrium Theory”, Journal of Economic Methodo logy, Vol. 9, No. 2, pp 119-139 Archer, M. S. and Tritter, J. Q. (2000); “Rational Choice Theory: Resisting Colonization”, London: Routledge. Arrow, K. J. and Debreu, G. (1954) “Existence of Equilibrium for a Competitive Economy,” Econometrica, Vol. 22, No. 3, pp 265-290 Amariglio, J. and Ruccio, D. F. (2002); “Modern Economics: The Case of the Disappearing Body”, Cambridge Journal of Economics, Vol. 26, pp 81-103. Aspromourgos, T, (1986); “On the Origins of the Term „Neoclassical?”, Cambridge Journal of Economics, Vol. 10, pp 265-270 Black, J. (1997); “A Dictionary of Economics”, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Blaug, Mark, (1985), Economic Theory in Retrospect, New York, Cambridge University Press. Carmerer, C. F and Fehr, E, (2006); “When does Economic Man Dominate Social Behaviour?” Science, Vol. 311, No. 5757, pp 47-52. Colander, D. and Landreth, H 1(994) History of Economic Thought, 3rd ed., Boston, Houghton Mifflin Company. Colander David (2000), The Death of Neoclassical Economics. Daal, J. and Jolink, A. (1993); “The Equilibrium Economics of Leon Walras”, London: Routledge. Daly, H. (1996), Beyond growth, Boston: Beacon Press Derek, G., Johnston, R., Pratt, G., Watts, M J, and Whatmore, S. (2009); “The Dictionary of Human Geography”, 5th edition, London: Wiley Blackwell Publishing. Dequech, D, (2007); “Neoclassical, Mainstream, Orthodox and Heterodox, Economics”, Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, Vol. 30, No. 2, pp 279- 302. Dow, S C., (2012), “Different Approaches to the Financial Crisis”, Economic Thought, Vol. 1, pp. 80. Elster, J, (1989); “Nuts and Bolts for the Social Sciences”, in Kjosavic, D. L. (ed.) Methodological Individualism and Rational Choice in Neoclassical Economics: A Review of Institutionalist Critique, Forum for Development Studies, Vol. 30, No. 2, pp 205-245 Fehr, E. and S G chter (2000) Fairness and Retaliation: The economics of reciprocity. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 14, 159-81 Finlayson, A. C., Lyson, T. A., Pleasant, A, Schafft, K. A. and Torres, R. J. (2005); “The Invisible Hand: Neoclassical Economics and the Ordering of Society”, Critical Sociology, Vol. 31, No. 4, pp 515-536 Fullbrook, E, (2001) “Real Science Is Pluralist”, post-autistic economics newsletter: issue no. 5, March, article 5, http://www.btinternet.com/~pae_news/review/issue5.htm Fullbrook, E. (2012) “To observe or not to observe: Complementary pluralism in physics and economics”, real-world economics review, issue no. 62, pp. 20- 28, http://www.paecon.net/PAEReview/issue62/Fullbrook62.p Fullbrook, E (2013) “New paradigm economics”, real-world economics review, issue no. 65, pp. 129-131, http://www.paecon.net/PAEReview/issue65/Fullbrook65.pdf Gans, J S, (1996); “On the Impossibility of Rational Choice under Incomplete Information” Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, Vol. 29, pp 287-309. Galbraith, J. K. (2001) “A Contribution on The State of Economics in France and the World”, Post – Austistic Economics Newsletter: issue no. 4, January article 1. Goldschmidt, N. (2002), Distorted economic relations: A new movement – the post- autistic economists – wants to renew economics. http://www.paecon.net/PAEarticles/Goldschmidt1.htm Gowdy, J. M. (2009); “Economics Interactions with other Disciplines”, Oxford: Eolss Publishing Ltd. Hicks, J R, (1983) Classics and Moderns (Collected Essays on Economic Theory, vol. III), Oxford, Basil Blackwell. Hodgson, G. M. (1992); “The Reconstruction of Economics: Is there still a Place for Neoclassical Theory?” Journal of Economic Issues, Vol. 26, No. 3, pp 749- 767. Hodgson, G. M. (2001), How Economics Forgot History: The Problem of Historical Specificity in Social Science. New York: Routledge. Hodgson, G. M. (2004); “The Evolution of Institutional Economics: Agency, Structure and Darwinism in American Institutionalism”, London: Routledge. Hodgson, G. M, (2007); “Meanings of Methodological Individualism”, Journal of Economic Methodology, Vol. 14, No. 2, pp 211-216 Kaldor, N. (1972); “The Irrelevance of Equilibrium Economics”, The Economic Journal, Vol. 82, No. 328, pp 1237-1255. Katouzian, H. (1980); “Ideology and Methods in Economics”, London: Macmillan. Kjosavic, D. L. (2003); “Methodological Individualism and Rational Choice in Neoclassical Economics: A Review of Institutionalist Critique”, Forum for Development Studies, Vol. 30, No. 2, pp 205-245. Kuhn, T. S, (1962), The structure of scientific revolutions, Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Lawson, T. (2013), "What is this 'school' called neoclassical economics?" Cambridge Journal of Economics 37(5): 947-983. Mulligan, Casey B (1998), Pecuniary incentives to work in the United States during World War II, Journal of Political Economy 106(5): 1033–1077. O?Sullivan, A. and Sheffrin, S. M. (2003); “Economics: Principles in Action”, New Jersey: Pearson Publishing Ltd. Rizvi, S. A. (1994); “The Micro foundations Project in General Equilibrium Theory”, Cambridge Journal of Economics, Vol. 18, pp 357-377. Udehn, L. (2002); “The Changing Face of Methodological Individualism”, Annual Review of Sociology, Vol. 28, pp 479-507. Wilson, E. O. (1998); “Consilience: The Unity of Knowledge”, New York: Alfred A. Knopf, Inc. Why does neoclassical thinking still dominate economics?: Available at: http://theconversation.com/why-does-neoclassical-thinking-still-dominate- economics-3861: (Accessed on 10 June 2022) Why neoclassical economics is dead: Available at: http://www.eastasiaforum.org/2009/05/30/why-neoclassical-economics- is- Krugman, Paul, (2009) “How Did Economists Get It So Wrong?” The New York Times Magazine, 6 September
