ABSTRACT
I feel quite strongly that the way one defines Post Keynesianism is methodological, and that’s why I’ve always thought it was important to be quite explicit about methodology.
Sheila Dow (in King, 1995, p. 154)
INTRODUCTION
In the last chapter we discussed and rebutted many of the criticisms levelled against Post Keynesianism. In this chapter we provide a more detailed assessment of the methodological foundations of Post Keynesian economics. This is especially warranted since Hodgson (2001a, pp. 230-1) remarks that ‘in the early years, Post Keynesianism lacked any developed methodological foundations ... [However], not only was Post Keynesianism originally founded on weak and undeveloped methodological foundations, but also, by the close of the century, ‘Post Keynesian’ economics had still failed to provide itself with an agreed and sufficient set of common core principles around which dissidents could gather. This omission might well prove fatal.’
