IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ids/ijplur/v5y2014i4p354-373.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Ecumenical foundations? On the coexistence of Austrian and neoclassical views on utility

Author

Listed:
  • Marcin Senderski

Abstract

Utility has long been a debatable concept, with many competing interpretations. The Austrian school and the neoclassical school, however broad these categories may seem, have made the most substantial and, by the same token, the most contrasting contributions to the theory of value. The paper's goal is not to adjudicate past arguments or observe the evolution of the theory, but rather to resolve contemporary misunderstandings. The references are made to such trouble spots as subjectivism vs. objectivism, cardinality vs. ordinality, and mathematical formalism vs. verbal formalism. Both schools entrenched themselves in their views long ago. Nevertheless, this paper shows that discussing utility on common ground and on the basis of shared presumptions is not necessarily the melody of the future. The paper is concluded with recommendations on how the current dissent may be attenuated.

Suggested Citation

  • Marcin Senderski, 2014. "Ecumenical foundations? On the coexistence of Austrian and neoclassical views on utility," International Journal of Pluralism and Economics Education, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 5(4), pages 354-373.
    • Handle: RePEc:ids:ijplur:v:5:y:2014:i:4:p:354-373
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.inderscience.com/link.php?id=68322
    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.

    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:ids:ijplur:v:5:y:2014:i:4:p:354-373. 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: Sarah Parker (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.inderscience.com/browse/index.php?journalID=319 .

    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.