Download This PaperWhy Post Keynesianism is Not Yet a Science
Economic Analysis and Policy, Vol. 43(1), March 2013, pp. 95-106
12 Pages Posted: 12 Mar 2013
There are 2 versions of this paper
Why Post Keynesianism Is Not Yet a Science
Date Written: March 1, 2013
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.
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation
Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?
Recommended Papers
-
Confused Confusers: How to Stop Thinking Like an Economist and Start Thinking Like a Scientist
-
Geometrical Exposition of Structural Axiomatic Economics (I): Fundamentals
-
The Emergence of Profit and Interest in the Monetary Circuit
-
The Emergence of Profit and Interest in the Monetary Circuit
-
Trade, Productivity, Income, and Profit: The Comparative Advantage of Structural Axiomatic Analysis
-
Walras's Law of Markets as Special Case of the General Period Core Theorem
-
The Truly General Theory of Employment: How Keynes Could Have Succeeded
-
Rethinking Macroeconomics in the Light of the Financial Crisis