Why Post Keynesianism is not yet a science

Egmont Kakarot-Handtke ()

MPRA Paper from University Library of Munich, Germany

Abstract: In a programmatic article Alfred Eichner explained, from a Post Keynesian perspective, why neoclassical economics is not yet a science. This was some time ago and one would expect that Post Keynesianism, with a heightened awareness of scientific standards, has done much better than alternative approaches in the meantime. There is wide agreement that this is not the case. Explanations, though, differ widely. The present – strictly formal – inquiry identifies an elementary logical flaw. This strengthens the argument that the Post Keynesian motto ‘it is better to be roughly right than precisely wrong!’ is methodologically indefensible.

Keywords: new framework of concepts; structure-centric; axiom set; consistency; Post Keynesian hard core; logical rigor; loose verbal reasoning; hypothetico-deductive method; profit; retained profit; saving; general complementarity; IS-fallacy (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: B22 B41 E12 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2012-09
New Economics Papers: this item is included in nep-hme, nep-hpe, nep-mac and nep-pke
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/43171/1/MPRA_paper_43171.pdf original version (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:pra:mprapa:43171

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in MPRA Paper from University Library of Munich, Germany Ludwigstraße 33, D-80539 Munich, Germany. Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Joachim Winter ().