Many economists have expressed concern that approaches borrowed from the humanities or from the softer social sciences will detract from the rigor and objectivity of economic science and give voice to those without proper training-and in so doing reduce the discipline to a science no more defensible than alchemy. Since much feminist thought in economics draws heavily from intellectual traditions alien to mainstream economists (e.g. critical interpretive theory, cultural studies, and feminist theory), some economists may wonder what such modes of inquiry have to offer economics.' Further, they may ask, are there no pitfalls in modes of inquiry not disciplined by accepted economic methodologies? In short, what do those Visigoths know? My purpose is to address issues in method and theory underlying recent feminist work in economics, and to explain how economics may gain by opening its disciplinary gates. From the perspective of traditional mainstream practice in economics, two prominent issues emerge in considering modes of inquiry and theory drawn from other disciplines. The first has to do with what counts as theory and the role of critique in theorizing. The second has to do with the need to sort out better theories from worse and the perceived dangers of rampant relativism. I will address these in turn.

We explore whether a priority given to a husband's career within a family could partly explain the gender wage gap. We show that restrictions preventing women from pursuing job opportunities, regardless of location, are likely to depress women's relative pay more than will restrictions requiring women to place a high value on non-pecuniary aspects of jobs. However, neither restriction is likely to have a large effect in the absence of interaction with investment in firm-specific human capital. The effects of such restrictions on wage differentials are likely to be large enough that empirical studies which do not examine wages, human capital investment and job search in a simultaneous equations framework could produce results which are seriously biased.

Using a new and unique data set, this paper applies a systems approach to the study of potential competition, prices, and entry relations in airline city-pair markets. Consistent with limit pricing models, future entry is directly influenced by current prices. Current prices thus appear to provide an important signal to potential entrants about the probability of profitable entry. While results indicate the existence of barriers to entry, these barriers appear to have no independent effects on price beyond there effect on actual competition through increases in concentration. Copyright 1990 by MIT Press.