1. The Importance of Rhetoric and Framing

The diagram highlights another possible concern, as highlighted by one commentator. The separation of theory and empirical analysis, combined with the nature of journal publication, may have led to a heavy emphasis on empirical analyses and a corresponding lack of attention to theoretical issues.

Peer review and research assessment exercises tend to constrain research to lie within the bounds of Kuhn’s ‘normal science’, where the fundamentals are not challenged. A few key institutions, organisations and journals can be very influential in defining what is ‘acceptable’ (Gillies 2006). Chang (2014) describes some of these constraints when he writes of mainstream economics being defined by its theoretical approach rather than its subject matter.

We are all story tellers, even when the stories are dressed up with equations, tables and graphs. An underlying theme of this book is that the development of ideas, the provision of information, the choice of conclusions and the significance of those conclusions are developed in a political environment. The politics in relation to academia, the political sphere, and the news media is very important in terms of its implications for public perceptions of issues. It shapes what is considered acceptable and what is considered correct. There is a heavy subjective dimension to people’s willingness to agree or disagree with findings presented to them, and also to the conclusions that researchers are prepared to draw from their analyses. These aspects also need to be understood in order to judge the value of findings and to understand the environment in which findings are used.

Note that ‘proof’ in law is not proof. Rather, it is persuasion of a judge or jury to interpret the evidence in a desired way.

No representation, whether a mathematical model, an econometric equation or set of equations, a graph, or a verbal description of a structure, is presenting a picture of the real world. They are all alternative structures. Whenever these are used to make claims about the real world, they are therefore being used as analogies.

A more common perspective is to require economics research to conform to fixed conventions and rules.