The Synthesis of Economic Law, Evolution, and History

Kakarot-Handtke, Egmont (2014): The Synthesis of Economic Law, Evolution, and History.

Abstract

It has long been criticized that history is almost entirely absent from orthodox economics. This deficiency is due to the fact that equilibrium and time make an odd couple. Because equilibrium is one of the crucial hard-core propositions of the research program it cannot be abandoned. This impedes the treatment of time in a methodologically acceptable manner. The orthodox approach is based on indefensible axioms which are in this paper replaced by objective structural axioms. This enables the synthesis of timeless economic laws, randomness, and goal-oriented human action, which are the essential elements of a formally consistent historical account.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: new framework of concepts; structure-centric; axiom set; cumulative causation; First Economic Law; Period Core; propensity function
• Subjects: B - History of Economic Thought, Methodology, and Heterodox Approaches > B4 - Economic Methodology > B49 - Other; B - History of Economic Thought, Methodology, and Heterodox Approaches > B5 - Current Heterodox Approaches > B59 - Other; E - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics > E1 - General Aggregative Models > E17 - Forecasting and Simulation: Models and Applications

References

Berlin, I. (2002). Freedom and Its Betrayal. London: Chatto Windus.

Desai, M. (2008). Profit and Profit Theory. In S. N. Durlauf, and L. E. Blume (Eds.), The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics Online, pages 1–11. Palgrave Macmillan, 2nd edition. URL http://www.dictionaryofeconomics.com/article?id= pde2008_P000213.

Hahn, F. H. (1984). Equilibrium and Macroeconomics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Hahn, F. H. (1991). The Next Hundred Years. Economic Journal, 101(404): 47–50.

Hilbert, D. (2005). Axiomatic Thought. In W. Ewald (Ed.), From Kant to Hilbert. A Source Book in the Foundations of Mathematics, volume II, pages 1107–1115. Oxford, New York, NY: Oxford University Press. (1918).

Hodgson, G. M. (2001). How Economics Forgot History. The Problem of Historical Specificity in Social Science. London, New York, NY: Routledge.

Kakarot-Handtke, E. (2012). Primary and Secondary Markets. Levy Economics Institute Working Papers, 741: 1–27. URL http://www.levyinstitute.org/publications/ ?docid=1654.

Kakarot-Handtke, E. (2013). Confused Confusers: How to Stop Thinking Like an Economist and Start Thinking Like a Scientist. SSRN Working Paper Series, 2207598: 1–16. URL http://ssrn.com/abstract=2207598.

Kakarot-Handtke, E. (2014). The Three Fatal Mistakes of Yesterday Economics: Profit, I=S, Employment. SSRN Working Paper Series, 2489792: 1–13. URL http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2489792.

Keynes, J. M. (1937). The General Theory of Employment. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 51(2): 209–223. URL http://www.jstor.org/stable/1882087.

Klant, J. J. (1988). The Natural Order. In N. de Marchi (Ed.), The Popperian Legacy in Economics, pages 87–117. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Nadal, A. (2004). Freedom and Submission. Individuals and the Invisible Hand. In F. Ackerman, and A. Nadal (Eds.), The Flawed Foundations of General Equilibrium, pages 181–201. London, New York, NY: Routledge.

Obrinsky, M. (1981). The Profit Prophets. Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, 3(4): 491–502. URL http://www.jstor.org/stable/4537615.

Popper, K. R. (1994). The Myth of the Framework. In Defence of Science and Rationality., chapter Models, Instruments, and Truth, pages 154–184. London, New York, NY: Routledge.

Tómasson, G., and Bezemer, D. J. (2010). What is the Source of Profit and Interest? A Classical Conundrum Reconsidered. MPRA Paper, 20557: 1–34. URL http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/20557/.

Weintraub, E. R. (1985). Joan Robinson’s Critique of Equilibrium: An Appraisal. American Economic Review, Papers and Proceedings, 75(2): 146–149. URL http://www.jstor.org/stable/1805586.