Pizhuhish nāmah-i intiqādī-i mutūn va barnāmah hā-yi ̒ulūm-i insāni (Critical Studies in Texts & Programs of Human Sciences)

An Introduction to Teaching Economics with a Localization and Modernization Approach

Document Type : Research

Author

Mansoor Zaranejad
Abstract
The aim of this study is to discuss the method of teaching economics with a localization and modernization approach. Since the field of economics is constantly evolving and progressing, achieving this goal requires continuous modernization. Therefore, teaching economics with localization and modernization approach is inevitable. The localization of economics in all societies requires much attention to the structure, conditions and realities of the economy as well as the norms and values ​​of the societies. In Islamic societies, such requirement means that economics has to be thought with an Islamic approach. The key to succeed in this matter is the availability of economists who are well aware of Islamic economics with great experiences in teaching and conducting research and also the availability of relevant materials and textbooks in this field. According to the findings of the study, the first step in teaching economics is to begin with critical evaluation of the concept of economic man and to continue with investigation of some methodological considerations. To this end, it is need the scientific theories should be considered as a set of explanatory propositions explaining the causal relationship between the variables involved. These propositions consist of presumptions, normative propositions and positive propositions. Religious beliefs and moral values are highly effective in structuring the presumptions and creating and developing the scientific theories. The study indicates that the education system should give a great priority to the way of thinking about economics and using creative approaches. Likewise, blind promotion of economic theories should be avoided. We should not give any ideological importance to the presumptions and the dominant analytical approaches, and one must avoid acceptance of these presumptions and theories without adequate attention. Unlike the dominant claim in the economic literature, the actual behavior of people is severely affected by moral considerations and consists of a very rich set of values and moral preferences. The empirical evidence shows that in developed societies like the United States, Germany and Russia, as well as communities such as migrating tribes of Indonesian, people’s behavior is not based on selfishness. In the present time, people show significant interest in moral and religious approaches, and the Islamic societies are faced with high demand for providing Islamic economic texts and teaching economics with Islamic approach. To this end, it is necessary to arrange and draw up economic courses with an Islamic approach for undergraduate and higher levels, particularly as regards microeconomics.

Subjects

منابع
Becker, G. S. (1993). Human Capital: A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis, with Special Reference to Education. 3rd Edition, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Bohnet, I. and B. S. Frey. (1999a). “Social Distance and Other-Regarding Behavior in Dictator Games: Comment”, The American Economic Review, LXXXIX..
Bohnet, I. and B. S. Frey. (1999b). “The Sound of Silence in Prisoner’s Dilemma and Dictator Games”, Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, XXXVIII.
Bowles, S. and H. Herbert (2004). “Persistent Parochialism: Trust and Exclusion in Ethnic Networks”, Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 55: 1-23.
Carrerer, C. (2003), Behavioral Game Theory, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Charness, G., E. Haruvy, and D. Sonsino (2007). “Social Distance and Reciprocity: An Internet Experiment”, Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 63(1).
Collard, D. (1978). Altruism and the Economy: A Study in Non-Selfish Economics, Oxford: Martin Robertson.
Frohlich, N. and J. Oppenheimer (1998). “Some Consequences of E-mail vs. Face-to-Face Communication in Experiment”, Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization”, No. 35.
Fehr, Ernst and Klaus M. Schmidt (1999). “A Theory of Fairness, Competition, and Cooperation”, The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 114(3).
Fehr, E. and K. M. Schmidt. (2006). “The Economics of Fairness, Reciprocity and Altruism- Experimental Evidence and New Theories”, in S. C. Kolm and J. M. Ythier (Eds.). Handbook of the Economics of Giving, Altruism and Reciprocity, North-Holland: Foundations.
Gui, B. (1987). Eléments Pour une Definition D’économie Communautaire, Noteset Documents 19–20.
Heyne. P. (1994). “Passing Judgments. Bulletin of the Association of Christian”, Economists, 23.
Keynes, J. M. (1936). The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money, London: Macmillan.
Kolm, S. C. (1983). “Altruism and Efficiency, Ethics”, 94 (1).
Peil, Jan; and Irene Van Staveren (2009). Handbook of Economics and Ethics, Edward Elgar.
Phelps, E. (1975). Altruism, Morality and Economic Theory, New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Rankin, F. W. (2006). “Requests and Social Distance in Dictator Games”, Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 60(1).
Scharlemann, J. P; W, C. C. Eckel; A. Kacelnick, and R.W. Wilson (2001). “The Value of a Smile: Game Theory with a Human Face”, Journal of Economic Psychology, No. 22.
Schumacher, E. F. (1977). A Guide for the Perplexed, New York: Harper and Row.
Scott, N.; and J. Seglow (2007). Altruism: Concepts in the Social Sciences, London: Open University.
Seabright, P. (2004). The Company of Strangers: A Natural History of Economic Life, Princeton and Oxford: Princeton University Press.
Seglow, J. (2002). “Altruism and Freedom”, In Jonathan Seglow (ed.). The Ethics of Altruism, Special Issue of Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy, 5 (4).
Sen, A. K. (1987). On Ethics and Economics, Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
Staveren, I. V. (2001). The values of economics: An Aristotelian perspective. London: Rotledge.
Uhlaner, C. J. (1989). “Relational Goods and Participation: Incorporating Sociality into a Theory of Rational Action”, Public Choice, 62.

  • Receive Date 10 May 2013
  • Revise Date 21 April 2014
  • Accept Date 12 June 2013

Guide for Authors

Submit Manuscript

Reviewers

Contact Us