The Evolution of Lakatos’s Repercussion on the Methodology of Economics
The repercussion of Imre Lakatos’s methodology in economics has passed through quite different periods. His influence can be seen in discussions that affect economics as basic science (“positive economics”) and applied science (“normative economics”). This study examines the main lines of this histo...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | HOPOS 2014-03, Vol.4 (1), p.1-25 |
|---|---|
| 1. Verfasser: | |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 25 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 1 |
| container_start_page | 1 |
| container_title | HOPOS |
| container_volume | 4 |
| creator | Gonzalez, Wenceslao J. |
| description | The repercussion of Imre Lakatos’s methodology in economics has passed through quite different periods. His influence can be seen in discussions that affect economics as basic science (“positive economics”) and applied science (“normative economics”). This study examines the main lines of this historical trajectory and makes a critical analysis of the evolution of its repercussions on economic methodology. Starting with the initial period of promising attitude (1972–74), the analysis moves on through the middle period of more influence (1974–89) and then turns to the critical stance of the later period (1989–). These steps provide a clear picture of strengths and weaknesses of the contributions of Lakatos’s methodology of scientific research programs to economic methodology. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1086/675401 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>jstor_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_crossref_primary_10_1086_675401</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>10.1086/675401</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>10.1086/675401</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c206t-9b9cc9379cb8f44412595c90b2079b6b2dc4c7dd3ae2d3a7b3fd93642390e5013</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqN0FFLwzAQAOAgCo45f0NBEV-qSZqmzaOMqoOKIPO5tGm6dm69kmuFvfk3_Hv-ErN1r4L3cBfIx91xhFwyesdoLO9lFArKTsiEs1D6kgt6enhzP2RxfE5miGvqQijH6YQslrXxkk_YDH0DrQeVl-YfeQ_48_WN3pvpjNUD4uGv9XqHX0xfQwkbWO32PNHQwrbReEHOqnyDZnasU_L-mCznz376-rSYP6S-5lT2viqU1iqIlC7iSgjBeKhCrWjBaaQKWfBSCx2VZZAb7lJUBFWpAil4oKgJKQum5Gbsqy0gWlNlnW22ud1ljGb7G2TjDRy8HeGg60bnK-isQczWMNjWLXhkWVdWjl7_gzp2NbI19mD_mvsLzj10dg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>The Evolution of Lakatos’s Repercussion on the Methodology of Economics</title><source>Jstor Complete Legacy</source><creator>Gonzalez, Wenceslao J.</creator><creatorcontrib>Gonzalez, Wenceslao J.</creatorcontrib><description>The repercussion of Imre Lakatos’s methodology in economics has passed through quite different periods. His influence can be seen in discussions that affect economics as basic science (“positive economics”) and applied science (“normative economics”). This study examines the main lines of this historical trajectory and makes a critical analysis of the evolution of its repercussions on economic methodology. Starting with the initial period of promising attitude (1972–74), the analysis moves on through the middle period of more influence (1974–89) and then turns to the critical stance of the later period (1989–). These steps provide a clear picture of strengths and weaknesses of the contributions of Lakatos’s methodology of scientific research programs to economic methodology.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2152-5188</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2156-6240</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1086/675401</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>University of Chicago Press</publisher><subject>Economic forecasting ; Economic research ; Economic theory ; Empiricism ; Heuristics ; Historical methodology ; Neoclassical economics ; Research methods ; Scientific method</subject><ispartof>HOPOS, 2014-03, Vol.4 (1), p.1-25</ispartof><rights>2014 by the International Society for the History of Philosophy of Science. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c206t-9b9cc9379cb8f44412595c90b2079b6b2dc4c7dd3ae2d3a7b3fd93642390e5013</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,799,27901,27902</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Gonzalez, Wenceslao J.</creatorcontrib><title>The Evolution of Lakatos’s Repercussion on the Methodology of Economics</title><title>HOPOS</title><description>The repercussion of Imre Lakatos’s methodology in economics has passed through quite different periods. His influence can be seen in discussions that affect economics as basic science (“positive economics”) and applied science (“normative economics”). This study examines the main lines of this historical trajectory and makes a critical analysis of the evolution of its repercussions on economic methodology. Starting with the initial period of promising attitude (1972–74), the analysis moves on through the middle period of more influence (1974–89) and then turns to the critical stance of the later period (1989–). These steps provide a clear picture of strengths and weaknesses of the contributions of Lakatos’s methodology of scientific research programs to economic methodology.</description><subject>Economic forecasting</subject><subject>Economic research</subject><subject>Economic theory</subject><subject>Empiricism</subject><subject>Heuristics</subject><subject>Historical methodology</subject><subject>Neoclassical economics</subject><subject>Research methods</subject><subject>Scientific method</subject><issn>2152-5188</issn><issn>2156-6240</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2014</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqN0FFLwzAQAOAgCo45f0NBEV-qSZqmzaOMqoOKIPO5tGm6dm69kmuFvfk3_Hv-ErN1r4L3cBfIx91xhFwyesdoLO9lFArKTsiEs1D6kgt6enhzP2RxfE5miGvqQijH6YQslrXxkk_YDH0DrQeVl-YfeQ_48_WN3pvpjNUD4uGv9XqHX0xfQwkbWO32PNHQwrbReEHOqnyDZnasU_L-mCznz376-rSYP6S-5lT2viqU1iqIlC7iSgjBeKhCrWjBaaQKWfBSCx2VZZAb7lJUBFWpAil4oKgJKQum5Gbsqy0gWlNlnW22ud1ljGb7G2TjDRy8HeGg60bnK-isQczWMNjWLXhkWVdWjl7_gzp2NbI19mD_mvsLzj10dg</recordid><startdate>20140301</startdate><enddate>20140301</enddate><creator>Gonzalez, Wenceslao J.</creator><general>University of Chicago Press</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20140301</creationdate><title>The Evolution of Lakatos’s Repercussion on the Methodology of Economics</title><author>Gonzalez, Wenceslao J.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c206t-9b9cc9379cb8f44412595c90b2079b6b2dc4c7dd3ae2d3a7b3fd93642390e5013</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2014</creationdate><topic>Economic forecasting</topic><topic>Economic research</topic><topic>Economic theory</topic><topic>Empiricism</topic><topic>Heuristics</topic><topic>Historical methodology</topic><topic>Neoclassical economics</topic><topic>Research methods</topic><topic>Scientific method</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Gonzalez, Wenceslao J.</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><jtitle>HOPOS</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Gonzalez, Wenceslao J.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>The Evolution of Lakatos’s Repercussion on the Methodology of Economics</atitle><jtitle>HOPOS</jtitle><date>2014-03-01</date><risdate>2014</risdate><volume>4</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>1</spage><epage>25</epage><pages>1-25</pages><issn>2152-5188</issn><eissn>2156-6240</eissn><abstract>The repercussion of Imre Lakatos’s methodology in economics has passed through quite different periods. His influence can be seen in discussions that affect economics as basic science (“positive economics”) and applied science (“normative economics”). This study examines the main lines of this historical trajectory and makes a critical analysis of the evolution of its repercussions on economic methodology. Starting with the initial period of promising attitude (1972–74), the analysis moves on through the middle period of more influence (1974–89) and then turns to the critical stance of the later period (1989–). These steps provide a clear picture of strengths and weaknesses of the contributions of Lakatos’s methodology of scientific research programs to economic methodology.</abstract><pub>University of Chicago Press</pub><doi>10.1086/675401</doi><tpages>25</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 2152-5188 |
| ispartof | HOPOS, 2014-03, Vol.4 (1), p.1-25 |
| issn | 2152-5188 2156-6240 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_crossref_primary_10_1086_675401 |
| source | Jstor Complete Legacy |
| subjects | Economic forecasting Economic research Economic theory Empiricism Heuristics Historical methodology Neoclassical economics Research methods Scientific method |
| title | The Evolution of Lakatos’s Repercussion on the Methodology of Economics |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-14T12%3A29%3A25IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=The%20Evolution%20of%20Lakatos%E2%80%99s%20Repercussion%20on%20the%20Methodology%20of%20Economics&rft.jtitle=HOPOS&rft.au=Gonzalez,%20Wenceslao%20J.&rft.date=2014-03-01&rft.volume=4&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=1&rft.epage=25&rft.pages=1-25&rft.issn=2152-5188&rft.eissn=2156-6240&rft_id=info:doi/10.1086/675401&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_cross%3E10.1086/675401%3C/jstor_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_jstor_id=10.1086/675401&rfr_iscdi=true |