Abstract

Analysing the intense controversy between Hayek and Sraffa in 1932, this article throws light on whether their arguments were logically consistent and which philosophy of science axioms concerning knowledge, society and human beings their arguments were based upon. The purpose is to use the controversy as an example for clarifying the elemental preconditions of the economic science in order to validly reach the core of the economic theories and thus throw light on their historical and ideological conditions, range and validity of the knowledge produced. As an analytical tool the article makes use of Lakatos’ thoughts on research programmes and formal logic.