Why Post Keynesianism Is Not Yet a Science

17 Pages Posted: 30 Nov 2011 Last revised: 14 Jun 2015

See all articles by Egmont Kakarot-Handtke

Egmont Kakarot-Handtke

University of Stuttgart - Institute of Economics and Law

Multiple version iconThere are 2 versions of this paper

Date Written: November 30, 2011


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

JEL Classification: B22, B41, E12

Suggested Citation

Kakarot-Handtke, Egmont, Why Post Keynesianism Is Not Yet a Science (November 30, 2011). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1966438 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1966438

Egmont Kakarot-Handtke (Contact Author)

University of Stuttgart - Institute of Economics and Law ( email )

Keplerstrasse 17

Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?

Paper statistics

Abstract Views
PlumX Metrics