There have been many posts and essays written about macro methodology in the past decade. Some of my recent ones are below.
But What About Inflation? (May 20, 2017)
Why the Last Ten Years of Data Mean that Macro Has to Change: the macro models of 2006 would have assigned essentially zero probability to the macroeconomic events of the last ten years of data. That's a serious conflict - and so the models need a radical re-think, not a minor re-tooling (May 19, 2017)
The Puzzling Prevalence of Puzzles: A newcomer to macro might think that it would be hard to distinguish among the many competing hypotheses using the scant available data. In fact, academic macroeconomics' reliance on a priori theory-driven restrictions from the 1970s and 1980s give rise to a seemingly never-ending series of puzzles (failures to fit the data). I suggest that it might be a time for a change, given the cheapness of data and estimation (August 3, 2016).
Toy Models: A short essay about the superiority of "toy" models relative to "serious" models in what should be a time of great uncertainty about many key aspects of macroeconomic theory (July 2016)
Thoughts on "The Trouble With Macroeconomics": Paul Romer recently wrote a wide-ranging and sharp critique of macroeconomics. I offer a couple of responses. (September 15, 2016).
Methodology Specifics: I provide more specifics about my preferred approach to macroeconomic questions. (September 19, 2016).
On Blanchard, Keen, and Farmer: I wade back into the macro methodology morass. (October 5, 2016).