Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

General Equilibrium Theory and Professor Blaug

Contents:

Author Info

  • Fabio Petri

    ()

Registered author(s):

    Abstract

    In a series of recent papers professor Mark Blaug accuses the Formalist Revolution of the 1950s of having greatly damaged economic science by burying the conception of 'competition as a process' in favour of a conception of 'competition as an end-state', incompatible with realistic studies of stability. The paper argues that the criticism is convincing and in fact addressed at the Arrow-Debreu conception of equilibrium, which is a very-short-period conception due to the Walrasian treatment of the capital endowment. Given the unreality of the resulting model, which assumes complete futures markets and can study stability only under the auctioneer, the question arises of why the Arrow-Debreu model and its conception of equilibrium were so successful, given that traditionally the dominant conception of equilibrium had been a long-period one (even in Walras: new evidence is adduced in support of this last thesis). The answer is found in the problems of neoclassical capital theory. The conclusion is that professor Blaug's criticisms point to a necessity to return to the long-period method, but this requires abandoning the marginalist or supply-and-demand approach to value and distribution, because it was precisely the inability of the latter approach satisfactorily to determine long-period positions that motivated the switch to the sterile modern versions of general equilibrium

    Download Info

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
    File URL: http://www.econ-pol.unisi.it/quaderni/486.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Bibliographic Info

    Paper provided by Department of Economics, University of Siena in its series Department of Economics University of Siena with number 486.

    as in new window
    Length:
    Date of creation: Aug 2006
    Date of revision:
    Handle: RePEc:usi:wpaper:486

    Contact details of provider:
    Postal: Piazza S.Francesco,7 - 53100 Siena
    Phone: (39)(0577)232620
    Fax: (39)(0577)232661
    Email:
    Web page: http://www.deps.unisi.it/
    More information through EDIRC

    Related research

    Keywords:

    Find related papers by JEL classification:

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    References

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
    as in new window
    1. Blaug, M., 1998. "Misunderstanding Classical Economics - The Sraffian Interpretation of the Surplus Approach," Discussion Papers 9802, Exeter University, Department of Economics.
    2. Weintraub, E. Roy & Gayer, Ted, 2001. "Equilibrium Proofmaking," Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge University Press, vol. 23(04), pages 421-442, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Lists

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:usi:wpaper:486. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Fabrizio Becatti).

    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.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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