Mainstream, Strategic Interdependence and Economic Judgment: a methodological reconstruction from a Perceptive Perspective, 75 years after John Nash’s foundational contribution

This paper proposes a methodological reconstruction of contemporary economic mainstream, privileging structural continuity over rupture theses. From a Lakatosian approach, the transformations undergone by game theory, experimental economics, and behavioral economics are examined, interpreting them as coherent extensions of the neoclassical program. Within this framework, Ariel Rubinstein’s internal critique of the naturalistic view of economic theory is revisited, arguing that his perceptual stance—focused on the plausibility and representational value of models—offers more consistent grounds for sustaining the continuity of economic analysis. This methodological notion is articulated with Don Ross’s ontological defense of qualitative prediction, put forward in response to Alexander Rosenberg’s objections concerning the empirical entity of the discipline. The paper concludes with a reflection on the metaxioms that organize economic judgment, highlighting the internal coherence of the mainstream and its adaptive capacity.