A Review of Kuhnian and Lakatosian “Explanations” in Economics
AbstractIn the last few decades the influence on economics of the ideas of T. Kuhn and I. Lakatos was considerable. The increasing use of terms like “paradigms” and “scientific research programmes” in almost every field of economics, is indicative of the influence of these two philosophers. Furthermore, the introduction of the ideas of Kuhn and Lakatos in economics gave the stimulus for work on the nature of growth of economic knowledge. The paper starts by presenting the main influence of T. Kuhn on theories concerned with the evolution of economic theory. It continues with a review of the main criticisms regarding the appropriateness and applicability of Kuhnian ideas for economics. The same approach is followed in the case of I. Lakatos. After a classification and discussion of the main findings, the paper attempts to offer an interpretation of the general impact of these two philosophers science on ideas relating to the development of economic theories.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by University Library of Munich, Germany in its series MPRA Paper with number 16624.
Date of creation: Jan 2005
Date of revision:
Publication status: Published in History of Economic Ideas 2.XIII(2005): pp. 51-73
Development of economics; Economic Methodology; Kuhn; Lakatos;
Find related papers by JEL classification:
- B0 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - General
- A1 - General Economics and Teaching - - General Economics
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Andrea Salanti, 1994. "On the Lakatosian apple of discord in the history and methodology of economics," Finnish Economic Papers, Finnish Economic Association, vol. 7(1), pages 30-41, Spring.
- John Nightingale, 1994. "Situational determinism revisited: scientific research programmes in economics twenty years on," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 1(2), pages 233-252.
- Zouboulakis, Michel S., 2001. "Why do Evaluative Histories Matter after all?," Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Cambridge University Press, vol. 23(03), pages 369-381, September.
- Weintraub, E Roy, 1999. "How Should We Write the History of Twentieth-Century Economics?," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 15(4), pages 139-52, Winter.
- Rosenberg, Alexander, 1986. "Lakatosian Consolations for Economics," Economics and Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 2(01), pages 127-139, April.
- Peter Bofinger & Timo Wollmershäuser, 2003.
"Managed Floating as a Monetary Policy Strategy,"
Economic Change and Restructuring,
Springer, vol. 36(2), pages 81-109, June.
- Arjo Klamer, 1984. "Levels of Discourse in New Classical Economics," History of Political Economy, Duke University Press, vol. 16(2), pages 263-290, Summer.
- Eichner, Alfred S & Kregel, J A, 1975. "An Essay on Post-Keynesian Theory: A New Paradigm in Economics," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 13(4), pages 1293-1314, December.
- Siobhain McGovern, 1995. "On a maze of second thoughts and on the methodology of economic methodology," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 2(2), pages 223-238.
- John A. List, 2004.
"Neoclassical Theory Versus Prospect Theory: Evidence from the Marketplace,"
Econometric Society, vol. 72(2), pages 615-625, 03.
- John List, 2004. "Neoclassical theory versus prospect theory: Evidence from the marketplace," Framed Field Experiments 00174, The Field Experiments Website.
- John A. List, 2003. "Neoclassical Theory Versus Prospect Theory: Evidence from the Marketplace," NBER Working Papers 9736, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Weintraub, E. Roy, 1985. "Appraising General Equilibrium Analysis," Economics and Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 1(01), pages 23-37, April.
- Terrence Bensel & Bruce Elmslie, 1992. "Rethinking international trade theory: a methodological appraisal," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer, vol. 128(2), pages 249-265, June.
- Loasby, Brian J, 1971. "Hypothesis and Paradigm in the Theory of the Firm," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 81(324), pages 863-85, December.
- Louca, Francisco, 2001. "Intriguing Pendula: Founding Metaphors in the Analysis of Economic Fluctuations," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 25(1), pages 25-55, January.
- Blaug, Mark, 1976. "The Empirical Status of Human Capital Theory: A Slightly Jaundiced Survey," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 14(3), pages 827-55, September.
- Backhouse, R.E., 1991. "Lakatos and Economics," Discussion Papers 91-04, Department of Economics, University of Birmingham.
- A. E. Fernández Jilberto, 1991. "Introduction," International Journal of Political Economy, M.E. Sharpe, Inc., vol. 21(1), pages 3-9, April.
- G. Fulton, 1984. "Research Programmes in Economics," History of Political Economy, Duke University Press, vol. 16(2), pages 187-205, Summer.
- Maarten C. W. Janssen, 1991. "What Is This Thing Called Microfoundations?," History of Political Economy, Duke University Press, vol. 23(4), pages 687-712, Winter.
- Salanti, Andrea, 1991. "Roy Weintraub's Studies in Appraisal: Lakatosian Consolations or Something Else?," Economics and Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 7(02), pages 221-234, October.
- De Vroey, Michel, 2001. "Price Rigidity and Market-Clearing: A Conceptual Clarification," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 25(5), pages 639-55, September.
- Backhouse, R.E., 1993. "The Lakatosian Legacy in Economnic Methodology," Discussion Papers 93-14, Department of Economics, University of Birmingham.
- Hoover, K.D., 1990. "Scientific Research Program Or Tribe? A Joint Appraisal Of Lakatos And The New Classical Macroeconomics," Papers 69, California Davis - Institute of Governmental Affairs.
- Leonard Kunin & F. Stirton Weaver, 1971. "On the Structure of Scientific Revolutions in Economics," History of Political Economy, Duke University Press, vol. 3(2), pages 391-397, Fall.
- Rodney Maddock, 1984. "Rational Expectations Macrotheory: a Lakatosian Case Study in Program Adjustment," History of Political Economy, Duke University Press, vol. 16(2), pages 291-309, Summer.
- Sheila C. Dow, 1981. "Weintraub and Wiles: The Methodological Basis of Policy Conflict," Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, M.E. Sharpe, Inc., vol. 3(3), pages 325-339, April.
- Cross, Rodney, 1982. "The Duhem-Quine Thesis, Lakatos and the Appraisal of Theories in Macroeconomics," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 92(366), pages 320-40, June.
- Backhouse, Roger E., 1993. "Lakatosian Perspectives on General Equilibrium Analysis," Economics and Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 9(02), pages 271-282, October.
- Mark Blaug, 1972. "Was There a Marginal Revolution?," History of Political Economy, Duke University Press, vol. 4(2), pages 269-280, Fall.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Ekkehart Schlicht).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.