Marx's theory of social forms and Lakatos's methodology of scientific research programs
economists. According to Rosenberg, Milton Friedman's positive methodology is being supplanted by Lakatos's methodology of scientific research programs (MSRP). At any rate, the Kuhnian wave of the seventies is being swallowed up by the Lakatosian program. (Redman 142) There have been a number of attempts to comprehend mainstream (bourgeois) economics as a Lakatosian research program, or as a set of competing research programs. (Latsis, ed. passim; de Marchi and Blaug, eds.)i In contrast, the extent to which the Marxian study of capitalism can be interpreted from this perspective has hardly been explored.ii In the following sections some provisional steps in this direction will be taken. I shall first introduce a reading of Marx's Capital that emphasizes the systematic dialectic of economic categories unifying that work. I shall then ask whether we can arrive at a better understanding of Marx's systematic dialectic through considering how it contributes to a scientific research 1 program in Lakatos's sense of the term. Two other themes will arise along the way. Certain shortcomings in Lakatos's framework will be discussed. Also, a number of reasons for considering the Marxian research program superior to that of neoclassical economics will be mentioned. It should be stressed that the main topic of the present paper is the role of systematic dialectics in the Marxian research program. The other themes go far beyond the scope of single paper. Lakatos's work can be understood as a response to the dead-end of naive falsificationism. According to this simplistic methodology, theories are to be tested by deducing predictions from them and then determining whether the events predicted occur. If the predicted events do take place at some later time, this does not verify the validity of the theory. That would be to commit the fallacy of affirming the consequent; there may be many other theories that also lead to the prediction in question. In contrast, if the predicted events do not take place, that is sufficient to falsify the proposed theory..
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Lakatos's Approach on Prediction and Novel Facts.Wenceslao J. Gonzalez - 2001 - Theoria 16 (3):499-518.
Models and Methodologies in Current Theoretical High-Energy Physics.James T. Cushing - 1982 - Synthese 50 (1):5 - 101.
Falsificationism Revisited.Mehmet Elgin - 2007 - The Proceedings of the Twenty-First World Congress of Philosophy 5:101-106.
An Immanent Criticism of Lakatos' Account of the 'Degenerating Phase' of Bohr's Atomic Theory.Hans Radder - 1982 - Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 13 (1):99-109.
From the Method of Proofs and Refutations to the Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes.Gábor Forrai - 1993 - International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 7 (2):161-175.
Heuristic, Methodology or Logic of Discovery? Lakatos on Patterns of Thinking.Olga Kiss - 2006 - Perspectives on Science 14 (3):302-317.
Defeasible Reasoning + Partial Models: A Formal Framework for the Methodology of Research Programs. [REVIEW]Fernando Tohmé, Claudio Delrieux & Otávio Bueno - 2011 - Foundations of Science 16 (1):47-65.
Forschungsprogramm Und Wissenschaftsentwicklung.Kurt Bayertz - 1991 - Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 22 (2):229 - 243.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads16 ( #301,285 of 2,177,988 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #166,811 of 2,177,988 )
How can I increase my downloads?