Discussions of method are never purely abstract. As the examples examined in this work demonstrate, methodological choices reflect underlying ideological orientations and can lead to significantly different economic policy outcomes. The starting point, therefore, must be a rejection of theoretical constructions assumed to be universally valid across time and circumstances. Economics should instead be understood as a historically grounded discipline, shaped by contingent and evolving realities. Following Karl Popper, any meaningful abstraction must be anchored in empirical and historical observation. When this condition is not satisfied, economics risks generating conceptual structures that resemble myths rather than scientific explanations - coherent systems of thought that lack correspondence with real-world dynamics.
