Crisis and methodology: some heterodox misunderstandings
AbstractWhether justified by the concrete circumstances or not, an economic crisis is, by simple association, taken as an implicit refutation of the invisible hand vision and the underlying theory. The fundamental heterodox critique locates the source of apparent theoretical difficulties at the level of methodology. Although acceptable in principle, this belief involves some actual misunderstandings with regard to the respective roles of deterministic laws and deductive reasoning. In order to clarify these, the present paper revisits some key episodes in the history of economic methodology.
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 43260.
Date of creation: 13 Jun 2012
Date of revision:
financial crisis; intellectual crisis; power of ideas; material consistency; logical consistency; determinism; deductive method; failure of reason; common sense; domain of economics; Cournot’s Unfitness Proposition;
Find related papers by JEL classification:
- B10 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - History of Economic Thought through 1925 - - - General
- B20 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - History of Economic Thought since 1925 - - - General
- B41 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - Economic Methodology - - - Economic Methodology
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
- NEP-ALL-2013-01-07 (All new papers)
- NEP-HME-2013-01-07 (Heterodox Microeconomics)
- NEP-HPE-2013-01-07 (History & Philosophy of Economics)
- NEP-PKE-2013-01-07 (Post Keynesian 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.:
- Joseph Stiglitz, 2011. "The Failure of Macroeconomics in America," China & World Economy, Institute of World Economics and Politics, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, vol. 19(5), pages 17-30, 09.
- Sheila C. Dow, 2005. "Axioms and Babylonian thought: a reply," Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, M.E. Sharpe, Inc., vol. 27(3), pages 385-391, April.
- Roger E. Backhouse & Steven G. Medema, 2009. "Retrospectives: On the Definition of Economics," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 23(1), pages 221-33, Winter.
- Laidler,David, 1999.
"Fabricating the Keynesian Revolution,"
Cambridge University Press, number 9780521641739, December.
- Weintraub, E. Roy, 1985. "Appraising General Equilibrium Analysis," Economics and Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 1(01), pages 23-37, April.
- Tomasson, Gunnar & Bezemer, Dirk J, 2010. "What is the Source of Profit and Interest? A Classical Conundrum Reconsidered," MPRA Paper 20320, University Library of Munich, Germany.
- Kakarot-Handtke, Egmont, 2013. "Understanding Profit and the Markets: The Canonical Model," MPRA Paper 48691, University Library of Munich, Germany.
- Kakarot-Handtke, Egmont, 2013. "Toolism! A Critique of Econophysics," MPRA Paper 46630, University Library of Munich, Germany.
- Kakarot-Handtke, Egmont, 2003. "How to Get Rid of Demand–Supply–Equilibrium for Good," MPRA Paper 46917, University Library of Munich, Germany.
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.