From: Gerald_A_Levy@MSN.COM
Date: Fri Sep 16 2005 - 09:18:57 EDT
> > Of course, we could also conduct empirical research to determine > > how well different Marxian theories are able to grasp empirical > > realities and trends in relation to each other. Alan Freeman > > wrote a paper in 1999 on that topic, which appears at the above > > site: < http://time.dufe.edu.cn/wencong/freeman/10.rtf > > > "FOUR ENDOGENOUS MARKET FAILURES WHICH (TSS) > > VALUE EXPLAINS BETTER: INEQUALITY, UNEMPLOYMENT, > > CRISIS AND LIQUIDITY PREFERENCE?" > > *Do others agree or disagree with Alan's claims in this paper? > (at least, it has the same title). I wouldn't say that this paper > falls into the category of "empirical research." It is a > theoretical excursus from the TSS point of view, illustrated by 4 > graphs showing data from the US economy. For my part, I'm hard > pressed to find any explanation of the "four failures" in the paper > (crises, perhaps, but not the others). Allin: I agree that Freeman's paper should not be viewed as one presenting the results of empirical research. Rather, there are claims made about how TSS value supposedly is a "scientifically superior category" because it is a non-equilibrium theory of value and hence (by reference to stylized facts) is better able to express the real non-equilibrium processes of inequality, unemployment, crisis, and liquidity preference. A couple of things strike me about this argument: 1) no Marxians, "simultaneists" included, would deny that the 4 "market failures" are not equilibrium processes. So, there seems to me to be a kind of disconnect between what Freeman is claiming non-TSSers believe and what those non-TSS theories suggest. 2) 'stylized facts' are substituted for empirical research in the paper. The interesting question here might be whether it is or is not possible to construct an empirical "test" of different conceptions of value that people from a variety of perspectives could agree as being legitimate. No doubt, a variety of "tests" could be constructed but I seriously doubt (based on the historical record of scholarly exchanges among Marxians re value) that all would agree that the specifications of and methodology of a particular test are valid. In any event, I doubt that anyone would claim that empirical research into how different theories of value are able to grasp the 4 "market failures" would be worthless. That research, though, would have to go way beyond simple assertions like -- since inequality, unemployment crisis, and liquidity preferences are examples of non-equilibrium processes therefore the category of TSS value is scientifically superior. In solidarity, Jerry
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Sep 17 2005 - 00:00:01 EDT