What does #econtwitter think about the following: These days, many economists like to label themselves as either mainstream or heterodox economists. These self-labellings are in my opinion imprecise and sometimes misleading. #hetecon

The word mainstream/orthodox indicates that it is the belief or theory currently supported by the majority of the profession. Today's mainstream school of economic thought is the neoclassical/marginalist school. If an economist adheres to it, then why not simply say so.

Heterodox means not conforming with accepted or orthodox standards or beliefs. Thus, heterodox economics is an umbrella term for all those who currently oppose neoclassical economics. Every school of economic thought other than the current orthodoxy is heterodox by definition.

The terms mainstream and heterodox are unsuitable for indicating what an economist is in favour of. Hundred years from now, one of the current heterodox schools of economic thought could be the new mainstream, and neoclassical economics would be one of the heterodox schools.

I know that some economists are trying to elaborate on a positive formulation for heterodox economics. IMO, they are using the wrong label for this task. They should either create a new school of economic thought under a different brand or adhere to one of the existing schools.

Those who do not want to commit themselves to a particular school should be called eclectic, as they select their doctrines from various schools. Some might not like the negative connotations associated with “eclectic”, but it is an accurate designation for what they are.