IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/usi/wpaper/452.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Shackle versus Savage: non-probabilistic alternatives to subjective probability theory in the 1950s

Author

Listed:
  • Carlo Zappia

    ()

  • Marcello Basili

    ()

Abstract

G.L.S Shackle’s rejection of the probability tradition stemming from Knight's definition of uncertainty was a crucial episode in the development of modern decision theory. A set of methodological statements characterizing Shackle’s stance, abandoned for long, especially after Savage’s Foundations, have been re-discovered and are at the basis of current non-expected utility theories, in particular of the non-additive probability approach to decision making. This paper examines the discussion between Shackle and his critics in the 1950s. Drawing on Shackle’s papers housed at Cambridge University Library as well as on printed matter, we show that some critics correctly understood two aspects of Shackle’s theory which are of the utmost importance in our view: the non-additive character of the theory and the possibility of interpreting Shackle’s ascendancy functions as a specific distortion of the weighting function of the decision maker. It is argued that Shackle neither completely understood criticisms nor appropriately developed suggestions put forward by scholars like Kenneth Arrow, Ward Edwards, Nicholas Georgescu- Roegen. Had he succeeded in doing so, we contend, his theory might have been a more satisfactory alternative to Savage’s theory than it actually was.

Suggested Citation

  • Carlo Zappia & Marcello Basili, 2005. "Shackle versus Savage: non-probabilistic alternatives to subjective probability theory in the 1950s," Department of Economics University of Siena 452, Department of Economics, University of Siena.
  • Handle: RePEc:usi:wpaper:452
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://repec.deps.unisi.it/quaderni/452.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Andrew E. Clark & Paul Frijters & Michael A. Shields, 2008. "Relative Income, Happiness, and Utility: An Explanation for the Easterlin Paradox and Other Puzzles," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, pages 95-144.
    2. Andrew E. Clark & David Masclet & Marie Claire Villeval, 2006. "Effort, revenu et rang. Une étude expérimentale," Revue économique, Presses de Sciences-Po, pages 635-643.
    3. Frank, Robert H, 1985. "The Demand for Unobservable and Other Nonpositional Goods," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, pages 101-116.
    4. Corneo, Giacomo & Jeanne, Olivier, 1998. "Social organization, status, and savings behavior," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, pages 37-51.
    5. Fershtman, Chaim & Murphy, Kevin M & Weiss, Yoram, 1996. "Social Status, Education, and Growth," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 104(1), pages 108-132, February.
    6. Cooper, Ben & Garcia-Penalosa, Cecilia & Funk, Peter, 2001. "Status Effects and Negative Utility Growth," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 111(473), pages 642-665, July.
    7. Samuel Bowles & Yongjin Park, 2005. "Emulation, Inequality, and Work Hours: Was Thorsten Veblen Right?," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 115(507), pages 397-412, November.
    8. Andrew E. Clark & Paul Frijters & Michael A. Shields, 2008. "Relative Income, Happiness, and Utility: An Explanation for the Easterlin Paradox and Other Puzzles," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, pages 95-144.
    9. Ed Hopkins & Tatiana Kornienko, 2004. "Running to Keep in the Same Place: Consumer Choice as a Game of Status," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, pages 1085-1107.
    10. Robson, Arthur J, 1992. "Status, the Distribution of Wealth, Private and Social Attitudes to Risk," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 60(4), pages 837-857, July.
    11. H. Leibenstein, 1950. "Bandwagon, Snob, and Veblen Effects in the Theory of Consumers' Demand," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 64(2), pages 183-207.
    12. Clark, Andrew E. & Oswald, Andrew J., 1998. "Comparison-concave utility and following behaviour in social and economic settings," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, pages 133-155.
    13. Cole, Harold L & Mailath, George J & Postlewaite, Andrew, 1992. "Social Norms, Savings Behavior, and Growth," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 100(6), pages 1092-1125, December.
    14. Veblen, Thorstein, 1899. "The Theory of the Leisure Class," History of Economic Thought Books, McMaster University Archive for the History of Economic Thought, number veblen1899.
    15. Bagwell, Laurie Simon & Bernheim, B Douglas, 1996. "Veblen Effects in a Theory of Conspicuous Consumption," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, pages 349-373.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Keywords

    uncertainty; decision theory; non-additive measures;

    JEL classification:

    • B21 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - History of Economic Thought since 1925 - - - Microeconomics
    • D21 - Microeconomics - - Production and Organizations - - - Firm Behavior: Theory

    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:usi:wpaper:452. 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). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/desieit.html .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.