Philip Mirowski is Carl Koch Chair of Economics and the History and Philosophy of Science, and Fellow of the Reilly Center, University of Notre Dame. He is author of, among others, Machine Dreams (2002), The Effortless Economy of Science? (2004), More Heat than Light (1989), Never Let a Serious Crisis Go to Waste (2013), and ScienceMart: privatizing American science (2011). He is editor of Agreement on Demand (2006) and The Road from Mont Pèlerin: the making of the neoliberal thought collective (2009), and Building Chicago Economics (2011) among other works. Outside of ongoing research on the history and analysis of the commercialization of science, he is also working on a computational complexity approach to the crisis, and a new book on the history of the Bank of Sweden Prize in Economics, sometimes called the Nobel. He was awarded the Ludwig Fleck Prize from 4S in 2006, and has been visiting professor at Yale, Oxford, NYU, Duke, Paris, the University of Technology-Sydney and the University of Amsterdam.
Philip E. Mirowski
By this expert
A meditation on Vercelli, Vernengo and Levitt & Seccareccia
The Political Movement that Dared not Speak its own Name: The Neoliberal Thought Collective Under Erasure
Why do so many people who should know better argue that Neoliberalism ‘does not exist’?
Featuring this expert
Does general equilibrium theory sufficiently enhance our understanding of the economic process to make the entire exercise worthwhile, if we consider that other forms of thinking may have been ‘crowded out’ as a result of its being the ‘dominant discourse’? What, in the end, have we really learned from it?
Is Neoliberalism a fixed set of ideas, or even an identifiable political movement?
In the final webinar in the Philosophy of Economics group in 2015, professor Philip Mirowski will join us for a discussion of his work in Philosophy of Economics. We will ask Professor Mirowski “What is the object of study of microeconomics?”
The Nobel Memorial Prize defines high achievement in economics, and it validates the discipline’s claim for scientific authority. And yet, historically, it can be understood as a reflection of domestic policy conflicts in Sweden.