Lakatosian Perspectives on General Equilibrium Analysis

Backhouse, Roger E.

doi:10.1017/s0266267100001565

Cited by 4 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Collaborative efforts at Nafplion and Capri produced two edited volumes: Latsis, 1976a;andde Marchi andBlaug, 1991, respectively. See also Jalladeau, 1978;Archibald, 1979;Hands, 1979;Goodwin, 1980;Cross, 1982;Fulton, 1984;Hands, 1985;Weintraub, 1985;Rosenberg, 1986;Khalil, 1987;Glass and Johnson, 1988;Hands, 1990;Hands, 1991a;Hands, 1991b;Salanti, 1991;Backhouse, 1993;and McGovern, 1995. For the view that Lakatos is "the philosopher who has . .…”

Section: The Underemployment Of Msrp In Irmentioning

confidence: 99%

How Not to Be Lakatos Intolerant: Appraising Progress in IR Research

Elman

2002

Int Studies Q

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite the popularity of Imre Lakatos's ideas and numerous references to his Methodology of Scientific Research Programs~MSRP!, IR scholars often misstate and misapply his criteria for appraising theoretical development. This article provides a more complete description of Lakatos's metric, addresses a number of critiques related to its use, and surveys how MSRP has been used to evaluate IR research. It suggests that IR proponents of Lakatos's methodology could better appreciate the limits of its application, and that those who use his metric could do so in a more informed way. The article argues for a sustained discussion about the promises and difficulties of theory appraisal, and suggests that MSRP may be a useful point of departure for that dialogue. It calls for IR theorists to undertake comparative analyses of different rationalist metrics to provide the basis for making informed judgments about their different strengths and weaknesses in helping to produce better theories.

show abstract

Section: The Underemployment Of Msrp In Irmentioning

confidence: 99%

How Not to Be Lakatos Intolerant: Appraising Progress in IR Research

Elman

2002

Int Studies Q

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Moreover, it should be noted that Weintraub actually uses Lakatos's methodology in the most favorable way for GET. After all, as Backhouse (1993) points out, following a strict Lakatosian perspective there is apparently "no reason not to place [GET] in the protective belt, with all that this implies for the way it is appraised." What this would imply, however, is simply that GET, being devoid of empirical content, should be regarded as "bad" economics.…”

Section: Mere Rhetoricmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Reply to Professor Weintraub

Salanti

1993

Economics and Philosophy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Bunlardan Forrai'nin (Forrai, 2002) ve Blaug'un (Blaug, 2010) çalışması tarihçilikle bağlantılı olmasıyla bu çalışmada anılmaya değerdir. Benzer biçimde Backhouse (Backhouse, 1993) da Lakastos'un araştırma programının sosyal bilimlerdeki bazı kuramsal çıkmazları başarıyla aşmayı sağladığını göstermesi bağlamında dikkati çekicidir. İlaveten Lakatos'u etkilemiş olan Popper ve Kuhn'un epistemolojik yaklaşımlarının Lakatos'un yaklaşımıyla sosyal bilim sorunları bağlamında karşılaştırılmasıyla alakalı da değerli çalışmalar mevcuttur (Forrai, 2002;George, 2016).…”

unclassified

Lakatos’un Felsefefi ve Tarihyazım: Tımar Sisteminin İşlevsizleşmesi Örneği

Kabacaoğlu

2023

beytulhikme

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Imre Lakatos is a philosopher who profoundly influenced today's understanding of science, and his epistemology proposal has also affected history science. However, Lakatos is not well known in Turkish literature despite this global situation. Whereas, when we look at history science from the Lakatosian point of view, most of the problems related to historiography become easier to solve. One of these problems is whether the decay of old arguments will lead to the questioning of their scientific validity. In this respect, different research on the timar system was examined in this study. The arguments in these studies were analyzed according to the Lakatos program, and the links between them were revealed. In this respect, it has been observed that the science of history has progressed cumulatively over time. This result is consistent with Lakatos' argument.

show abstract

Lakatosian Perspectives on General Equilibrium Analysis

Cited by 4 publications

References 12 publications

How Not to Be Lakatos Intolerant: Appraising Progress in IR Research

How Not to Be Lakatos Intolerant: Appraising Progress in IR Research

A Reply to Professor Weintraub

Lakatos’un Felsefefi ve Tarihyazım: Tımar Sisteminin İşlevsizleşmesi Örneği

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About