We conclude this book with a general remark. The main idea put forth in this inquiry referred to a specific perspective of the social world, its main ingredients being methodological individualism, the assumption of selfinterested behavior, and the idea of channeling human behavior through social institutions. This set of principles characterized the theoretical program of political economy before its gradual transformation into neoclassical economics. These powerful core ideas are not a priori restricted to any particular social sphere or historical period, though. They can, therefore, serve as a general research program for the social sciences.

A genuine political economy that would fill the “cognitive, motivational, and institutional vacuum” of neoclassical economics (Albert, 1979, p. 11) would at the same time provide a platform for the unification and further development of the social sciences. Such a political economy would not be vulnerable to the familiar criticism of “economic imperialism” for two reasons. First, it would integrate the different disciplines of the social sciences in the general project of the study of institutions. The unique vantage point and specialized knowledge of every discipline could be united in the common institutional perspective that seems to be of equal importance in political science, sociology, and economics. Second, it would not adopt neoclassical microeconomics as its microfoundation. The behavioral model of problem solving inspired by cognitive psychology and evolutionary epistemology retains the virtues of the rationalchoice model without neglecting the rule-guided dimension of human behavior.