Why Post Keynesianism is Not Yet a Science

Egmont Kakarot-Handtke ()
Additional contact information
Egmont Kakarot-Handtke: University of Stuttgart, Institute of Economics and Law, Keplerstrasse 17, D-70174 Stuttgart, Germany

Economic Analysis and Policy, 2013, vol. 43, issue 1, 95-108

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: 2013
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (2)

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0313592613500063
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

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:eee:ecanpo:v:43:y:2013:i:1:p:95-108

Access Statistics for this article

Economic Analysis and Policy is currently edited by Clevo Wilson

More articles in Economic Analysis and Policy from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Catherine Liu ().