Since the seventies, there has been a strong ressurgence of microfoundations in Economics, alongside with a change in mainstream's attitude towards theories that try to rate theories as scientific or non-scientific based on the degree of formalization and, specially, on the presence or lack of microfundations. This change has led to a gradual separation of theory and practice that seems to be harmful to economics. This paper criticizes microfoundations from two different standpoints: first, through reviewing what we call internal criticisms to microfoundations, mainly related to the misleading consequences of reductionism and of the adoption of representative agents in economic modeling; and, second, by developing external critics that highlight the impossibility of finding a priori criteria for judging theories, due to the inexistence of correct and definitive foundations of knowledge. Last, the pragmatic perspective is presented as an alternative.
Macroeconomics microfoundations; pragmatism; selection criteria; Methodology