 the anthropological versions), one can make a further distinction between the weak versions, more plausible, and the strong ones, irreparably ideological.Depicting different types of “economic man” (each depending on the social context) is in fact possible with the help of cultural anthropology, and social psychology (a branch of psychology economists have strangely ignored), if only those types are contrived as socially and/or historically determined abstractions (such as Weber's, Korsch's, and Fromm's concepts of "Idealtypus", “historical specification”, and “social character”).Even a Marxist theoretician such as Gramsci—reminds Caruso—admitted of the "homo economicus" as a useful abstraction on the ground of economic theory, provided that we grant there be as many "homines oeconomici" as the modes of production.