@article{8e08ef066fb54669a2f918171b8c080f,
title = "Keynes, Kuhn and the sociology of knowledge: a comment on Pernecky and Wojick",
abstract = "Mark Pernecky and Paul Wojick use T.S. Kuhn{\textquoteright}s philosophy of science to diagnose {\textquoteleft}The problematic nature and consequences of the effort to force Keynes into the conceptual cul-de-sac of Walrasian economics{\textquoteright}. But their diagnosis is itself problematical in nature and consequence. It assumes the virtues of a pre-Kuhnian philosophy of knowledge that the Kuhnian meta-framework overtly discards. One way to eliminate the inconsistency is to recognise that Kuhn{\textquoteright}s philosophy of science and sociology of knowledge function to immunise theories from criticism. Anyone who wishes to embrace a sociologically more critical philosophy ought to consider instead the philosophical attitude of critical rationalism. ",
keywords = "Keynes, Kuhn, Popper, Paradigm, Sociology of Knowledge",
author = "Rod Thomas",
note = "Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2020 The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Cambridge Political Economy Society. All rights reserved. Copyright: Copyright 2020 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.",
year = "2020",
month = nov,
day = "1",
doi = "10.1093/cje/beaa016",
language = "English",
volume = "44",
pages = "1415--1424",
journal = "Cambridge Journal of Economics",
issn = "0309-166X",
publisher = "Oxford University Press",
number = "6",
}