Rational vs historical reconstructions. A note on Blaug

Abstract

The paper focuses on Blaug’s distinction between rational and historical reconstruction within the historiography of economics. Blaug’s distinction is shown to be sterile and misleading and his definitions of no avail to clear thinking. Historical reconstruction (as defined by Blaug) is en empty box for reasons which are basically theoretical and not simply practical (as Blaug seems to hold). Moreover, Blaug’s primary polemical target is Whig historiography and not rational reconstruction: the two concepts coincide only by means of an ad hoc definition. Blaug’s criticism does not apply to other uses of the concept of rational reconstruction such as that proposed by Lakatos