IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Thirteen theses on progress in economic methodology


  • D. Wade Hands

    (University of Puget Sound)


No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • D. Wade Hands, 1990. "Thirteen theses on progress in economic methodology," Finnish Economic Papers, Finnish Economic Association, vol. 3(1), pages 72-76, Spring.
  • Handle: RePEc:fep:journl:v:3:y:1990:i:1:p:72-76

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Cross, Rodney, 1982. "The Duhem-Quine Thesis, Lakatos and the Appraisal of Theories in Macroeconomics," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 92(366), pages 320-340, June.
    2. Boland, Lawrence A, 1981. "On the Futility of Criticizing the Neoclassical Maximization Hypothesis," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 71(5), pages 1031-1036, December.
    3. Musgrave, Alan, 1981. "'Unreal Assumptions' in Economic Theory: The F-Twist Untwisted," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34(3), pages 377-387.
    4. Salanti, Andrea, 1987. "Falsificationism and Fallibilism as Epistemic Foundations of Economics: A Critical View," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(3), pages 368-392.
    5. Douglas W. Hands, 1985. "Second Thoughts on Lakatos," History of Political Economy, Duke University Press, vol. 17(1), pages 1-16, Spring.
    6. Hendry, David F, 1980. "Econometrics-Alchemy or Science?," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 47(188), pages 387-406, November.
    7. Bruce J. Caldwell, 1990. "Does methodology matter? : how should it be practiced?," Finnish Economic Papers, Finnish Economic Association, vol. 3(1), pages 64-71, Spring.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.

    Cited by:

    1. repec:hal:journl:dumas-00906285 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Slavica Manic, PhD, 2014. "Has Economics Lost Its Own Identity?," Asian Economic and Financial Review, Asian Economic and Social Society, vol. 4(9), pages 1190-1200, September.

    More about this item


    Access and download statistics


    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:fep:journl:v:3:y:1990:i:1:p:72-76. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Editorial Secretary). General contact details of provider: .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.