The Keynesian Critique of the Neoclassical Scientific Research Program
Name: DREYFUSS RAPHAEL STEGE
Publication date: 18/11/2025
Examining board:
Name |
Role |
|---|---|
| ALAIN PIERRE CLAUDE HENRI HERSCOVICI | Presidente |
| HUGO EDUARDO ARAÚJO DA GAMA CERQUEIRA | Examinador Externo |
| JOSÉ RICARDO FUCIDJI | Examinador Externo |
| ROBERTO RESENDE SIMIQUELI | Examinador Externo |
| ROBSON ANTONIO GRASSI | Examinador Interno |
Summary: This thesis develops an epistemological analysis of mainstream economic theory, represented by the Neoclassical Scientific Research Program (SRP), through the lens of Imre Lakatos’s methodology. Its central objective is to assess whether the Keynesian critique constitutes an incremental or a fundamental rupture in relation to this program. The study first examines different approaches within the philosophy of science — from Popperian falsificationism to Kuhn’s contributions — to justify the use of Lakatos’s framework. It then characterizes the neoclassical SRP, identifying its hard core, its auxiliary hypotheses, and the flexibilization mechanisms employed to preserve its theoretical coherence. Finally, it analyzes key contributions from the Keynesian and post-Keynesian traditions, with particular emphasis on ontological uncertainty, the historicity of expectations, and the incompatibility of the ergodicity assumption with real-world economies. The investigation concludes that the (post-)Keynesian
approach constitutes a fundamental epistemological rupture: it rejects the core assumptions of the neoclassical hard core, exposes the degenerative character of the SRP, and advances an alternative paradigm grounded in radical uncertainty, historical causality, institutions, and the interdependence of economic agents.
