Shackle on Equilibrium

A Critique

Bibliographic Data

ID9256792
AuthorsGary Mongiovi (corresponding author)
Year2000
Volume58
Issue1
Pages108-124
Publication date2000-03-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenueReview of Social Economy (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0034-6764 • E-ISSN: 1470-1162
PublisherInforma UK Limited (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1080/003467600363138
OpenAlexW1981551111
LanguageEN
Citations received1
References cited13

This paper presents a critical evaluation of Shackle's views on economic method. Shackle's arguments against equilibrium analysis are shown to apply to orthodox theory, which has subjectivist foundations, but not to the objectivist classical approach associated with Sraffa. The long-period equilibrium method is indispensable to the analysis of how market societies function. Moreover, since the classical theory contains no trace of the factor substitution mechanisms that underpin neoclassical orthodoxy, its explanations of distribution, employment and outputs must take explicit account of institutions, power and ethical norms. Thus there is no conflict between social economics and the method of the classical economists and Sraffa. On the contrary, the classical approach provides a rigorous framework for the investigation of the very issues that are at the center of institutional and social economics

Economics · Epistemology · General equilibrium theory · Mathematical economics · Microeconomics · Neoclassical economics · Objectivism · Orthodoxy · Positive economics · Shackle · Subjectivism · Economic Theory and Institutions · Economic Theory and Policy · Philosophy · Political Economy and Marxism

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub