IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/rsocec/v68y2010i3p339-363.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

On Logical Difficulties, Philosophy, and the T.C.E. Explanation of the Firm

Author

Listed:
  • Stephen Nash
  • Liza Rybak

Abstract

By exploring the implications of the linkage between Knight and Pragmatism, some non-trivial implications can be argued to exist. Specifically, section 2 outlines the T.C.E. literature, and how it exists in an atmosphere mixed with Marshallian competition and Knightian uncertainty. Section 3 then considers the disparate philosophical positions behind the work of Knight and Marshall. Knight's critique of Marshall is seminal, not because of any trivial technical innovations that Knight may have inspired within economic theory, but because Knight grounds his work on a philosophical viewpoint that effectively devastated Hegelian philosophy: American Pragmatism. Section 4 then links together the previous two sections by considering how the T.C.E. literature exhibits a dependency on both Pragmatism and Hegelian philosophy. The non-trivial implications of understanding the T.C.E. literature as a branch of Marshallian economics, which recognises Knightian uncertainty, are developed in section 5. Possible conclusions and a summary of the argument are provided in section 6.

Suggested Citation

  • Stephen Nash & Liza Rybak, 2010. "On Logical Difficulties, Philosophy, and the T.C.E. Explanation of the Firm," Review of Social Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 68(3), pages 339-363.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:rsocec:v:68:y:2010:i:3:p:339-363
    DOI: 10.1080/00346760902971847
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00346760902971847
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/00346760902971847?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    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:taf:rsocec:v:68:y:2010:i:3:p:339-363. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RRSE20 .

    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.