Schumpeter is especially known for his dynamic theory of innovation and entrepreneurship. What is less known are the epistemological, i.e. erkenntnis-theoretical questions, which led Schumpeter to the development of this idea. This article is based on the hypothesis that these initial questions might not have been sufficiently answered, and are in need of further development. Indeed Schumpeter argued many times for the provisional character of any theory, including his own. Thus, the theories developed by Schumpeter himself as well as by his intellectual successors are not sufficient to describe many of the facts relevant for economics and especially for innovation (for instance the psychology of innovation, anthropological and sociological questions of dissemination, etc.). Furthermore, the theories are not epistemologically consistent. Schumpeter has taken the first and important step into the right direction towards a modern economic theory. But throughout his life he struggled with its still-ingrained inconsistencies and the scope of sociological facts to be integrated. Therefore, for a consistent theoretical basis of innovation (addressing for instance the important policy question of how to develop it), the central idea of Schumpeter has to be reevaluated in order to develop it further. Just as in Schumpeter’s initial approach, this consistent and broader reconstruction of innovation theory requires the careful application of scientific epistemology in order to avoid the anthropomorphic pitfalls (teleologies) into which many economic theories have fallen. For Schumpeter, economic theories are tools. But tools are used for a purpose. If there is one important lesson to learn from the global financial crisis, it is that we should not use (analytic) microscopes as (financial) hammers without a second thought about their purpose.