Eriksson on critical realism: a comment
This note offers a critique of Ralf Eriksson's treatment of Critical Realism. Eriksson, in the context of an analysis of Keynes, makes several mistaken claims about Critical Realism. Specifically, contrary to Eriksson, Critical Realism does not claim that the world is independent of consciousness, that isolation and closure are equivalent, that abstraction and closure are equivalent, that Lawson employs double standards in the possibility of closed systems, or that realist theories must be simple. Eriksson attacks a vulgar form of realism, but not Critical Realism as it currently stands. We also argue that Eriksson's misinterpretations may be partially due to some ambiguous statements in the Critical Realist literature.
Volume (Year): 18 (2006)
Issue (Month): 1 ()
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.tandfonline.com/CRPE20|
|Order Information:||Web: http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/CRPE20|
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:revpoe:v:18:y:2006:i:1:p:105-112. 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: (Michael McNulty)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.