>From Homa Katzouzian's Ideology and Method in Economics (New York University Press, 1980): "...one is left wondering why we badly need a Marxian or post Marxian general equilibrium model which refers to 'political economic models of *competitive* capitalism...However, [Arun] Bose's reference to 'one "Walrasian" property which every theory of "general interdependence" under competitive capitalism must have' may give us a hint on some other reasons for his defense of the necessity of a general equilibrium model: [HK then quotes Bose]: 'This is the insight which made Walras cast the problem of general interdependence and long run values in a competitive capitalist market system in the form of the equilibrium values *derived from a system of simultaneous equations [emphasis HK]...the Marxian theory of value, capital and exploitation suffered much...from the *lack* of this insight...' "Or in other words the Marxian theory of value, etc, suffered from the fact that it was more realistic but less mathematical. For the recognition of sectoral economic interdependence itself does not require much insight; and even it had done so at at time that must certainly have been before the French physiocrats. Whereas the concept of *simultaneous* adjustments and equilibria is hardly a matter for *insight*; it is not even an abstraction from reality, but almost a figment of the imagination. Now perhaps a case can be made for the use of such an abstraction in theoretical analysis. But to call it an *insight* is clearly not a correct use of language. In any case this looks like an example of where a preference for the form, for mathematical techniques, would tend to determine the content, the research agenda, of an approach to economic theory." p. 176-77 TSS'ers may be interested in Katouzian's comments on the workings of invisible colleges in economics. Haven't read Katouzian's economic histories of Persia, either. Does anyone know anything about him? I enjoyed this book. Rakesh
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sun Dec 02 2001 - 00:00:05 EST