On a maze of second thoughts and on the methodology of economic methodology
Siobhain McGovern
Journal of Economic Methodology, 1995, vol. 2, issue 2, 223-238
Abstract:
This paper considers the debate surrounding the elucidation of Laka-tosian novel facts in Keynesian macroeconomics. An analysis of this debate highlights how, in the process of using methodologies to appraise economics, economic methodologists have been forced into adopting the methodology of historiographic research programmes (MHRP) as a method of appraising methodologies. It is argued here that the failure to find Lakatosian novel facts in Keynesian macroeconomics has prompted economic methodologists to consider the appropriateness of MHRP as a method of meta-methodological appraisal. This paper suggests that the failure to find Lakatosian novel facts in economics must necessarily lead economic methodologists into a Kuhnian-type investigation of what it is that economists actually do.
Keywords: Keynesian macroeconomics; Lakatos; novel facts; rational reconstructions; meta-methodology; Kuhnian analysis (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 1995
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)
Downloads: (external link)
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13501789500000016 (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
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:taf:jecmet:v:2:y:1995:i:2:p:223-238
Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/RJEC20
DOI: 10.1080/13501789500000016
Access Statistics for this article
Journal of Economic Methodology is currently edited by John Davis and D Wade Hands
More articles in Journal of Economic Methodology from Taylor & Francis Journals
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Chris Longhurst ().