Enlightenment as a Legacy: Critiques of Classical Economics and Pluralist Perspectives

Enlightenment thought was central to the rise of modern social sciences, bequeathing to Classical Economics a framework shaped by methodological individualism, a deterministic view of science, and a strong commitment to universality. Yet this inheritance seems to rest on a static and ahistorical conception of human nature. The present study follows that intellectual lineage through primary sources and, within the framework of Thomas Kuhn’s paradigm theory, asks what methodological difficulties arise from the universalist claim about “human nature.” The approach combines philosophical analysis with comparative theoretical review. Daniel M. Hausman’s criticisms of economic methodology are placed in dialogue with Karl Polanyi’s distinction between the formalist and substantivist conceptions of the economy. What emerges, I argue, is that neglecting the historical and cultural embeddedness of economic categories exposes the discipline to ideological influence. A more promising path, perhaps a necessary one, would be an economics that is historically self-aware, methodologically pluralist, and philosophically self-reflective. Adopting such an orientation could enhance the discipline’s objectivity while also deepening its explanatory capacity.