Correct Lars. The rejection of formalism as an answer in and of itself is one of the necessary pre-paradigm signatures listed in my book, but it is only the beginning of the real solution. Why? Because it leads to iconoclasm, but economic theory has been in iconoclasm for a very long time. What becomes ultimately necessary is the first signature of paradigm change and that is the willingness and ability to consider COMPLETE conceptual opposition to orthodoxy. That, and then with the new tool and/or insight that has always accompanied historical paradigm changes and enables theorists to see how applied policy causes temporal reality inversion….finally breaks the image and shows the way forward.

Like:

1) Conceptual Opposition: an austere statistical monetary and economic general equilibrium vs a dynamic, interactive, integrative and abundant monetary free flowing statistical disequilibrium created, enabled and controlled by:

2) Missed Insight: becoming aware of the fact that most basically money is accounting/double entry bookkeeping and thus must adhere to that discipline’s conventions so that

3) New tool/Insight: becoming aware of the tremendously powerful implementation point of retail sale for monetary and price policy because it is a true factor summing and ending point for the economic system and so potential temporal universe economic reality pivoting point and so

4) Temporal Reality Inversion: with equal direct and reciprocal monetary debits and credits at that point changes systemic austerity and individual purchasing power scarcity into abundance of both, that changes the economic vice of chronic inflation into beneficial deflation and last but not least will also enable the industrial policy rationality necessary to survive climate change.