Sometime ago, in a long post on dynamic modelling Alan offered the following as
an
" axiomatic foundation which any actual set of transition
rules":
(5)value cannot be created or destroyed in exchange
Michael W
IMO this is just the conservation principle that Mirowski has argued at length
19th Century economics adapted - for no good reason - from 19th century physics.
Or is it meant to capture the crude productionist marxist concept that value is
created only in production? In which case, no dialectical interpretation of Marx
can accept it: value is expanded and reproduced in the circulation of labour and
commodities through production and exchange.
Later Alan asks:
I'd also be interested to know how far Mike W would consider
the above list of axioms drift from his sceptical 'wish list'
for the desirable characteristics of a model.
Michael W
As far as I can judge, it does not address the same issue: how can a formal
model satisfactorily figure as a step in a dialectical presentation from
abstract to concrete grounding?
I have to come back to the kite I flew about what kinds of conditions of
adequacy we might want to impose on a model in such a location - when I have
more time.
Alan - sorry about the tardy response.
Comradely greetings,
Michael W.