Post-crisis economists reacted in one of three distinct ideological postures

Evidence

In that spirit, we might divide the reactions of the economics profession to the crisis into three broad categories: one, the orthodoxy was right all along and nothing that has transpired in recent events impugns the fundamental soundness of basic theory; two, the orthodox have made some unfortunate conceptual choices in the recent past, but the crisis has sobered us up, and we are working hard to rectify them, while maintaining fealty to all that was legitimate, timeless and dependable in neoclassical economics; and three, the best response would be to renounce neoclassical economics altogether, and start anew with some other tradition of economic thought. — Philip Mirowski, Never Let a Serious Crisis Go to Waste, 656

Categorization

• XREF: The three-part typology maps onto the reader’s interest in how an intellectual ‘thought collective’ preserves itself through crisis while appearing to adapt. — connects to: Economic crises are also conceptual and intellectual catastrophes — Philip Mirowski, Never Let a Serious Crisis Go to Waste, 45; Insulated theory communities respond to crisis by claiming vindication. — Philip Mirowski, Never Let a Serious Crisis Go to Waste, 442; Post-crisis economic consensus lists were dominated by orthodox defenders — Philip Mirowski, Never Let a Serious Crisis Go to Waste, 537