The Methodology of Macroeconomic Thought : A Conceptual Analysis of Schools of Thought in Economics ~ Sheila €.,Dow'~ University of Stirling Edward Elgar Cheteahans, UK' + Northainptor MA, USA‘hate have ound ladubtstie ances them. Toteach how wlive whoa eat, and yet withost being paralysed by hesitation, is peshapy he chief thing that pilosopny, in our age, can sl do fe hase who sady (ised, 198, 18) ‘e formulation of theories in economics, ss much a3 thedries within tchaviou, a te consequences ia aggregate of that behaviour, Netbodologias variously form theories about how economists fori thelr theories, establish thought snd iovestigation along fines which will generate as much knowledge 15 possible, Methodology can be approached Tom variety of sarkpoinis, depending opal of ey locacn ae omic level of mode building and atpr ea ine tgs il et lin wld ue Bel Fuh alr euler olivate ay ‘world view if generatly associated with a, ha te reicirw Menno Impl in methine (whet or ish ed ia ‘crieria for theory appraiea), i<-lor prescription. \We shell, ax far as possible, {init ou¢ snquiry to description of the content of different methodologies which canrespond to different bodies of theory. Thus, rather than ieating methodology ‘macroeconomics have frequently stemmed from x hick of eecognition that iffereatparticipats were employing diferent rédes of thought; or tiat there ‘wad’ 2 divergence between the mode‘of Uiooglt professed and the one st in practice. "The ft, hich we call the Cartesian/E ue iden’ aioe of though, is named, ot by coincidence, afer two isthematicians, the thid-century BC Greck,bei alone mage SET EIT oT Aeros cal ee aruda one a see ‘or all behaviour, of else be separable fom other clements of Behaviour ‘ = plex and exoletionary, and 4 ee an cent mre dees niin sie ase 24 Atemiam and Organicism Atomista, oF reductionisn, follows from the axiomatic structure af Cartesia’ ‘Euclidean thought. Beranse the entire logical stem in Cartesian Euclidean ‘thought depends on the basic axioms, is important to.make them 8 widely: acceptable as possible, ic lose as posible an approximation focbeing ‘self. ov \ Meter sae cath te gto cn choices a1 wh part af in pst sheen for epi fn Simon XF9S) Teg only Tr the seems, be eepencu aownde. In. ‘Bablonin towgh, ere mare Ean one woof sealing ith Ui isalOnged ac ea ge a Welly eer, 197}a; p.262 and 1973e; p.286; see also Carabel 1988, 1995). [tes nih be oe Sie ave for whale five dere of complex, {am of cemmecton btwn compen i cml tbe sed fxm lays connecting nds pars, la bis ace ratral weal be erase and nor, sits geerally opposed, nomic, (Kees, 1978. 9.277) 2.6. -Wncertainty. Probability and Expectations ‘These ton modes of thought determine the view taken of scientific knowledge,choice in fivour OI ne closed teoreical system preciades @ME——_‘gbylonian though being rather something other tan Cs the choice of any other system of thought (ot any lack of system), The renction thought. Paradox is then acceptable ax a general principe in 10 another school of thought is one of rejection. We shall se that ever those atc schools of thought which most clearly adopt son-dualistc reasoning wil reiain clements of Cantesian/Puclidesn thought to the extent that some take the stance of rejecting Cartesian/Euctidesn thought. ‘The second reaetion, which is ty "The final reaction posited by Chick Is one of synthesis, or transcendence, a8 Fates paradox.. The term ‘syathesa’ i being used here in. a quite diferent ‘ony ftom the ray it has ide ast Been used i combats, Most snably, the ——_Seerclassical synthesis was more an exercise in containment han tree syabesis | nthe sense of transcendence. rigogine and Stngers (1984) se the emergence | syethess incheensry with their ment that the instability generated by F ekreral strane ystems wi overnsebange devotion iabity ‘snot the treat to order fs generated by some extemal ife-Foree) seated from [x Catsian/Euetidean perapective 18 mot parade etait is wa it h—_Tacr provides the sohution Chick argues that esiomis Is Vong ay ay and some of which are