9. Klamer (1984, p. 286) in the New Classical economics or the rational expectation
approach recognized an “analysis resembling Lakatos’ positive heuristics”.
10. Janssen (1991, p. 697) examining the microfoundations and the modern
macroeconomic “schools” argued that neither monetarism nor Keynesianism shared wide
or narrow Lakatosian ingredients.
11. Salanti (1991) and Backhouse (1993) criticized Weintraub’s argument about the
significance of the programme of general equilibrium and its relevance with the Lakatosian
methodology. Similarly, Janssen commented (1991, pp. 698-9) that the “general Equilibrium
analysis” a wider programme than the neo-Walrasian explored by Weintraub, has no positive
or negative heuristics.
12. However Blaug (1990, p. 504) contrary to Hands, insisted that “Lakatos was quite right
to highlight the prediction of novel facts” as necessary ingredient of a “better” programme.
13. It has been argued recently that Kuhnian ideas have also provided a shield against
criticism for mainstream economics (see Fullbrook, 2003).
27
More intriguing information
1. A Review of Kuhnian and Lakatosian “Explanations” in Economics2. The name is absent
3. Deprivation Analysis in Declining Inner City Residential Areas: A Case Study From Izmir, Turkey.
4. Dual Inflation Under the Currency Board: The Challenges of Bulgarian EU Accession
5. The name is absent
6. Behavioural Characteristics and Financial Distress
7. The name is absent
8. The name is absent
9. Nurses' retention and hospital characteristics in New South Wales, CHERE Discussion Paper No 52
10. Forecasting Financial Crises and Contagion in Asia using Dynamic Factor Analysis