IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/cambje/v38y2014i5p1133-1154..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Non-Bayesian decision theory ahead of its time: the case of G. L. S. Shackle

Author

Listed:
  • Carlo Zappia

Abstract

This article deals with the reception of George L. S. Shackle’s volume Expectation in Economics, introducing a unique attempt to discard the probability framework in the investigation of behaviour under uncertainty. Through a fresh reading of the textual evidence, including correspondence held at Cambridge University Library, the article assesses why decision theorists’ interest in Shackle’s theory, substantial during the 1950s, faded away in the early 1960s. The article argues that, apart from Shackle’s refusal to comprehend that his critics were under the influence of a new subjective probability perspective, a major explanation of the dismissal of his work stays in Shackle’s stance not to establish a collaborative link with those critics who showed a positive attitude towards his theory. The article shows, though, that the discussion between Shackle and his critics hinged on a number of topics that are still crucial to the current developments of decision theory.

Suggested Citation

  • Carlo Zappia, 2014. "Non-Bayesian decision theory ahead of its time: the case of G. L. S. Shackle," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 38(5), pages 1133-1154.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:cambje:v:38:y:2014:i:5:p:1133-1154.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/cje/beu023
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Derbyshire, James, 2017. "Potential surprise theory as a theoretical foundation for scenario planning," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 77-87.
    2. Marina Bianchi & Sergio Nisticò, 2018. "Shackle: an enquirer into choice," Working Papers 2018-03, Universita' di Cassino, Dipartimento di Economia e Giurisprudenza.
    3. Rossen Rozenov, 2016. "Optimal Fiscal Adjustment under Uncertainty," IMF Working Papers 2016/069, International Monetary Fund.
    4. Carlo Zappia, 2015. "Daniel Ellsberg on the Ellsberg Paradox," Department of Economics University of Siena 716, Department of Economics, University of Siena.
    5. Derbyshire, James & Giovannetti, Emanuele, 2017. "Understanding the failure to understand New Product Development failures: Mitigating the uncertainty associated with innovating new products by combining scenario planning and forecasting," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 334-344.
    6. Bachner, G. & Mayer, J. & Steininger, K.W. & Anger-Kraavi, A. & Smith, A. & Barker, T.S., 2020. "Uncertainties in macroeconomic assessments of low-carbon transition pathways - The case of the European iron and steel industry," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 172(C).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:cambje:v:38:y:2014:i:5:p:1133-1154.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/cje .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.