David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
distraction that leads innocent Post Keynesians into “classical sin.” Davidson (1994, 1996) argues that core Post Keynesian (PK) ideas such as that insufficient aggregate demand arise from fundamental uncertainty in a monetary economy do not depend on nonlinearity or complexity, that these core concepts are axiomatically and ontologically true, and that the inability of agents to forecast well in dynamically complex situations reflects mere epistemological problems of insufficient computational abilities. Thus complex dynamics is merely a classical stalking horse. This writer (Rosser, 1990, 1998, 2001) disagrees with the argument presented above and its relatives (Mirowski, 1990; Carrier, 1993). Dynamic complexity provides a foundation for fundamental uncertainty in Keynesian and PK models, and this applies to most of the various sub-branches of PKE besides Davidson’s “fundamentalist” or “Keynes-Post Keynesian”2 approach. The argument will be considered regarding three subdivisions of Post Keynesianism as identified by Hamouda and Harcourt (1988): the aforementioned fundamentalist Keynesianism, Sraffian (or neo-Ricardian), and Kaleckian (or Kaleckian- Robinsonian).3 Following King (2002, chap. 10), I admit to being more in sympathy with those he describes as “synthesizers” than with the more partisan sectarians of these approaches.4 I shall describe how each sub-branch has been analyzed using ideas of..
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library||
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Barkley Rosser, Alternative Keynesian and Post Keynesian Perspectives on Uncertainty and Expectations.
Paul Davidson (1989). The Economics of Ignorance or Ignorance of Economics? Critical Review 3 (3-4):467-487.
Christopher Torr (1993). >What Can Austrian Economists Learn From the Post Keynesians? Reply to Davidson. Critical Review 7 (2-3):399-406.
Paul Davidson (1991). Is Probability Theory Relevant for Uncertainty? A Post Keynesian Perspective. Journal of Economic Perspectives 5:129--144.
Stephan Boehm & Karl Farmer (1993). Why the Acrimony? Reply to Davidson. Critical Review 7 (2-3):407-421.
Siobhan Austen & Therese Jefferson (2006). Comparing Responses to Critical Realism. Journal of Economic Methodology 13 (2):257-282.
J. Barkley Rosser, Complex Ecologic-Economic Dynamics and Environmental Policy Forthcoming, Ecological Economics.
Jesús Muñoz, Confirming Robinson´s Statement? A Lakatosian Analysis of Keynes and His Immediate Orthodoxy.
Paul Davidson (1993). Austrians and Post Keynesians on Economic Reality: Rejoinder to Critics. Critical Review 7 (2-3):423-444.
Lowell Gallaway & Richard Vedder (1989). The Keynesian Performance. Critical Review 3 (3-4):488-504.
David L. Prychitko (1993). After Davidson, Who Needs the Austrians? Reply to Davidson. Critical Review 7 (2-3):371-380.
Matthew C. Wilson (2009). Creativity, Probability and Uncertainty. Journal of Economic Methodology 16 (1):45-56.
Added to index2010-12-22
Total downloads13 ( #280,845 of 1,911,506 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #320,814 of 1,911,506 )
How can I increase my downloads?