Banca de DEFESA: MAYARA SILVA SOUSA PIRES
Uma banca de DEFESA de MESTRADO foi cadastrada pelo programa.DISCENTE : MAYARA SILVA SOUSA PIRES
DATA : 05/01/2021
HORA: 16:30
LOCAL: SBC
TÍTULO:
PÁGINAS: 60
GRANDE ÁREA: Ciências Sociais Aplicadas
ÁREA: Economia
SUBÁREA: Teoria Econômica
ESPECIALIDADE: Teoria Geral da Economia
RESUMO:
This work aims to understand what is behind scientific practice within the economic field - starting from the recognition that rhetoric and pluralism are essential to science itself. In the first part, retrieving the debates of Deirdre N. McCloskey and understanding that her starting point is a science whose debates must be primarily honest, we understand that little was discussed about the lack or absence of this honesty. That is, it is understood here that McCloskey lives an ideal of science and that other thinkers should be added to the debate to better understand the real activities of the field. In this sense, we have adopted the view of Bruno Latour with the motivation to read McCloskey's approaches through his lenses. Latour, therefore, is credited with the status of thinker of the malicious relations of science - that is, of the most realistic relations - showing that there are forces behind its practice in the economy. Thus, we move from a Mccloskeyan perspective of a kind and honest dialogue, to revisit the elephant in the room through a Latournian perspective of a persuasive and malicious dialogue. It is observed, therefore, that behind science there exist power relations that stimulate its production and practice, causing more powerful armies to impose themselves on weaker armies, transforming their truths into facts and the others into other fiction. In other words, we added a first new debate to science through rhetoric: the stimulus of economic science in terms of power relations. Based on this recognition, the second part of this study aims to open and expose the interior of the black boxes of economic science - starting with pluralism. It is understood that pluralism not only helps to understand the power relations and the role they play, but also offers important tools to open other black boxes. Rescuing debates from thinkers in the field, it is shown that pluralism should not be just the natural refuge for monist proposals, but the place of triumph of democracy and tolerance of the methodological alternatives of science. As we move between different lines of thought, we see that there seems to be a plurality of pluralisms in economic science, and that perhaps heterodoxy itself practices something similar to a non-plural pluralism - a kind of monistic pluralism. That is, we explore the notion that although pluralism is a prudent variable, it is not the main alternative to the power relations behind science. If the activities of the field move between non-plural relations and non-democratic views, perhaps debate needs to be observed through a political perspective and we do this exercise through the economic mainstream. Therefore, starting from this perspective, we expose three main points that we understand to be hidden within the black boxes of the field: economic science being constituted through relations of power and persuasion; limitations on rights can lead to intellectual servitude; and economic science is not necessarily “science” for everyone. At the end of this work, therefore, we add another debate to the field, now through pluralism: the need to open the black boxes through these three points.
MEMBROS DA BANCA:
Presidente - Interno ao Programa - 344365 - RAMON VICENTE GARCIA FERNANDEZ
Membro Titular - Examinador(a) Interno ao Programa - 1675686 - FABIO HENRIQUE BITTES TERRA
Membro Titular - Examinador(a) Externo à Instituição - JOSÉ FELIPE ARAUJO DE ALMEIDA - UFPR
Membro Suplente - Examinador(a) Interno ao Programa - 1760509 - ANAPATRICIA DE OLIVEIRA MORALES VILHA
Membro Suplente - Examinador(a) Externo à Instituição - ROBERTA MURAMATSU - UPM