It is in the man's nature (and especially the homo economicus one) to question everything and criticize it as best as he or she can. Although I agree with the vast majority of these critiques, people forget a couple of things: first, the neoclassical tools are just the tip of the iceberg..some formal old school stuff that insert in your mind crucial economic concepts (like scarcity or utility etc) that will shape your view of the world. The main thing is to understand, accept and develop it. but afterall, NO GOOD ECONOMIST takes it literally. On the other hand, I would like to see concrete alternatives to it. But...naturally there aren't...so we stick to the same old thing or we make simple incremental contributions. Which is fine. Big minds need to grow also. Plus, in order to be constructive and throughout in these assertions, one also has to know the neo-classical world pretty well. (...to be continued) It is hilarious however, to be in the middle...while attending tight econometric conferences to be called an airhead while in the opposite case being labeled as "neoclassical" which is among the lower lifeforms on Earth.:))
