Book contents
- Pasinetti and the Classical Keynesians
- Pasinetti and the Classical Keynesians
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Contributors
- Foreword
- Introduction
- 1 Reality (and Not Simply Abstract Rationality) as the Starting Point of Economic Theory
- 2 Economic Logic with Internal Consistency (and Not Only Formal Rigour)
- 3 Malthus and the Classics (Not Walras and the Marginalists) as the Major Inspiring Source in the History of Economic Thought
- 4 Non-ergodic (in Place of Stationary, Timeless) Economic Systems
- 5 Causality vs. Interdependence
- 6 Macroeconomics before Microeconomics
- 7 Disequilibrium and Instability (Not Equilibrium) as the Normal State of the Industrial Economies
- 8 Necessity of Finding an Appropriate Analytical Framework for Dealing with Technical Change and Economic Growth
- 9 A Strong, Deeply Felt, Social Concern
- 10 Why the Classic-Keynesian Trend May Be of Interest to a Young Scholar Today
- 11 Pasinetti’s Separation Theorem
- Author Index
- References
2 - Economic Logic with Internal Consistency (and Not Only Formal Rigour)
Realism and Internal Consistency in Piero Sraffa
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 17 February 2022
Book contents
- Pasinetti and the Classical Keynesians
- Pasinetti and the Classical Keynesians
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Contributors
- Foreword
- Introduction
- 1 Reality (and Not Simply Abstract Rationality) as the Starting Point of Economic Theory
- 2 Economic Logic with Internal Consistency (and Not Only Formal Rigour)
- 3 Malthus and the Classics (Not Walras and the Marginalists) as the Major Inspiring Source in the History of Economic Thought
- 4 Non-ergodic (in Place of Stationary, Timeless) Economic Systems
- 5 Causality vs. Interdependence
- 6 Macroeconomics before Microeconomics
- 7 Disequilibrium and Instability (Not Equilibrium) as the Normal State of the Industrial Economies
- 8 Necessity of Finding an Appropriate Analytical Framework for Dealing with Technical Change and Economic Growth
- 9 A Strong, Deeply Felt, Social Concern
- 10 Why the Classic-Keynesian Trend May Be of Interest to a Young Scholar Today
- 11 Pasinetti’s Separation Theorem
- Author Index
- References
Summary
We propose a rational reconstruction of Sraffa’s strategy for theory assessment with a focus on the issue of the realism of the premises and the role of internal logical consistency as distinct from formal rigour. Sraffa appears to follow a two-stage strategy: first, a rigorous logical reconstruction of the theory under scrutiny and the identification of its explicit and implicit assumptions; second, an accurate description of the empirical phenomena the theory, once logically reconstructed, is able to explain. The explanatory value of a given theory depends on its ability to select among the various economic forces and mechanisms in action in a given situation the one(s) that the theorist holds to be the most relevant and provide a logically consistent description of the chosen mechanism(s). No theoretical explanation of a given economic phenomenon may be considered acceptable if it is based on ill-defined theoretical notions since such notions stand in the way of an exact theoretical measurement of the magnitudes under investigation and thus prevent the theory of being correctly applied to the phenomena it was designed to explain.
Keywords
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Pasinetti and the Classical KeynesiansNine Methodological Issues, pp. 30 - 49Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2022
References
Bernanke, B. S. (2004) ‘The Great Moderation’, Remarks by Governor Ben S. Bernanke at the meetings of the Eastern Economic Association, Washington, DC; available at www.federalreserve.gov/boarddocs/speeches/2004/20040220/Google Scholar
Blaug, M. (1999) ‘Misunderstanding Classical Economics: The Sraffian Interpretation of the Surplus Approach’, in History of Political Economy, 31(2), pp. 213–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blaug, M. (2002) ‘Kurz and Salvadori on the Sraffian Interpretation of the Surplus Approach’, in History of Political Economy, 34(1), pp. 237–240.Google Scholar
Blaug, M. (2009) ‘The Trade-Off between Rigor and Relevance: Sraffian Economics as a Case in Point’, in History of Political Economy, 41(2), pp. 219–247.Google Scholar
Claar, V. V. and Forster, G. (2019) The Keynesian Revolution and Our Empty Economy, New York, Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clapham, J. H. (1922) ‘Of Empty Economic Boxes’, in The Economic Journal, 32(127), pp. 305–314.Google Scholar
Coniglione, F. (2004) ‘Between Abstraction and Idealization: Scientific Practice and Philosophical Awareness’, in Poznan Studies in the Philosophy of the Sciences and the Humanities, Special Issue Idealization XI: Historical Studies on Abstraction and Idealization, 82(11), pp. 59–110.Google Scholar
De Vroey, M. (2016) A History of Macroeconomics from Keynes to Lucas and Beyond, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eatwell, J. L. and Panico, C. (1987) ‘Sraffa, Piero’, in Eatwell, J. Milgate, M. and Newman, P. (eds.) The New Palgrave: A Dictionary of Economics, vol. 4, London, Macmillan, pp. 445–452.Google Scholar
Fratini, S. M. (2018) ‘Theories of Value and Ultimate Standards in Sraffa’s Notes of Summer 1927’, in Bulletin of Political Economy, 12(1–2), pp. 35–53.Google Scholar
Freni, G. and Salvadori, N. (2013) ‘The Construction of the Long-Run Market Supply Curves: Some Notes on Sraffa’s Critique of Partial Equilibrium Analysis’, in Levrero, E. S. Palumbo, A. and Stirati, A. (eds.) Sraffa and the Reconstruction of Economic Theory: Volume Three. Sraffa’s Legacy: Interpretations and Historical Perspectivs, Basingstoke and New York: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 189–216.Google Scholar
Friedman, M. (1953) ‘The Methodology of Positive Economics’, Part I of Friedman M., Essays in Positive Economics, Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, pp. 3–43, reprinted in Mäki, U. (ed.) The Methodology of Positive Economics: Reflections on the Milton Friedman Legacy, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2009, pp. 3–43.Google Scholar
Garegnani, P. (2002) ‘Misunderstanding Classical Economics? A Reply to Blaug’, in History of Political Economy, 34(1), pp. 241–254.Google Scholar
Garegnani, P. (2005) ‘On a Turning Point in Sraffa’s Theoretical and Interpretative Position in Late 1920s’, in European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, 12(3), pp. 453–459.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garegnani, P. (2011) ‘On Blaug Ten Years Later’, in History of Political Economy, 43(3), pp. 591–605.Google Scholar
Harcourt, G. C. (2012) ‘Cambridge Economic Tradition’, in King, J. E. (ed.) The Elgar Companion to Post Keynesian Economics, 2nd ed., Cheltenham and Northampton, Edward Elgar, pp. 61–68.Google Scholar
Hoover, K. D. (2017) ‘Situational Analysis’, in McIntyre, L and Rosenberg, A. (eds.) The Routledge Companion to Philosophy of Social Science, London and New York, Routledge, pp. 182–190.Google Scholar
Kurz, H. D. and Salvadori, N. (1995) Theory of Production: A Long-Period Analysis, Cambridge, New York and Melbourne, Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kurz, H. D. and Salvadori, N. (2002) ‘Mark Blaug on the Sraffian Interpretation of the Surplus Approach’, in History of Political Economy, 34(1), pp. 225–236.Google Scholar
Kurz, H. D. and Salvadori, N. (2005) ‘Representing the Production and Circulation of Commodities in Material Terms: On Sraffa’s Objectivism’, in Review of Political Economy, 17(3), pp. 413–441.Google Scholar
Kurz, H. D. and Salvadori, N. (2011) ‘In Favor of Rigor and Relevance: A Reply to Mark Blaug’, in History of Political Economy, 43(3), pp. 607–616.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lavoie, M. (2014) Post-Keynesian Economics: New Foundations, Cheltenham and Northampton, Edward Elgar.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lutz, F. A. and Hague, D. C. (1961) The Theory of Capital: Proceedings of a Conference Held by the International Economic Association, London, Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mäki, U. (1992) ‘On the Method of Isolation in Economics’, in Poznan Studies in the Philosophy of the Sciences and the Humanities, 26, pp. 319–354.Google Scholar
Mäki, U. (1998) ‘Instrumentalism’, in Davis, J. B. Hands, D. W. and Mäki, U. (eds.) The Handbook of Economic Methodology, Cheltenham and Northampton, Edward Elgar, pp. 253–256.Google Scholar
Mäki, U. (2000) ‘Kinds of Assumptions and Their Truth: Shaking an Untwisted F-Twist’, in Kyklos, 53(3), pp. 317–336.Google Scholar
Mäki, U. (2005) ‘Models Are Experiments, Experiments Are Models’, in Journal of Economic Methodology, 12(2), pp. 303–315.Google Scholar
Mäki, U. (2009) ‘Missing the World: Models as Isolations and Credible Surrogate Systems’, in Erkenntnis, 70(1), pp. 29–43.Google Scholar
Mishkin, F. S. (2011) ‘Over the Cliff: From the Subprime to the Global Financial Crisis’, in Journal of Economic Perspectives, 25(1), pp. 49–70.Google Scholar
Mongiovi, G. (1996) ‘Sraffa’s Critique of Marshall: A Reassessment’, in Cambridge Journal of Economics, 20(2), pp. 207–224.Google Scholar
Marcuzzo, M. C. and Rosselli, A. (2021) ‘On Sraffa’s Challenge to Causality in Economics’, in Sinha, A. (ed.) A Reflection on Sraffa’s Revolution in Economic Theory, London, Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 91–109.Google Scholar
Musgrave, A. (1981) ‘Unreal Assumptions in Economic Theory: The F-Twist Untwisted’, in Kyklos, 34(3), pp. 377–387.Google Scholar
Nowak, L. (1994b) ‘On Ontological Assumptions of Idealizational Theory’, in Theoria, IX(1), pp. 19–28.Google Scholar
Pasinetti, L. L. (2007) Keynes and the Cambridge Keynesians: A ‘Revolution in Economics’ to Be Accomplished, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Pigou, A. C. (1922) ‘Empty Economic Boxes: A Reply’, in The Economic Journal, 32(128), pp. 458–465.Google Scholar
Roncaglia, A. (1983) ‘Piero Sraffa and the Reconstruction of Political Economy’, in Banca Nazionale del Lavoro Quarterly Review, 36(147), pp. 337–350.Google Scholar
Roncaglia, A. (1991) ‘Sraffa’s 1925 Article and Marshall’s Theory’, in Quaderni di Storia dell’Economia Politica, 9, pp. 373–397.Google Scholar
Roncaglia, A. (1998) ‘Sraffa, Piero as an Interpreter of the Classical Economists’, in Kurz, H. D. and Salvadori, N. (eds.) The Elgar Companion to Classical Economics, vol. ii, Cheltenham and Northampton, Edward Elgar, pp. 399–404.Google Scholar
Salanti, A. (2014) ‘Rigor versus Relevance in Economic Theory: A Plea for a Different Methodological Perspective’, in History of Political Economy, 46(1), pp. 149–166.Google Scholar
Salvadori, N. and Signorino, R. (2007) ‘Piero Sraffa: Economic Reality, the Economist and Economic Theory: An Interpretation’, in Journal of Economic Methodology, 14(2), pp. 187–209.Google Scholar
Salvadori, N. and Signorino, R. (2015) ‘Review of Boumans M. and Klaes M. (eds.) (2013) Mark Blaug: Rebel with Many Causes, Cheltenham, UK and Northampton, MA, USA, Edward Elgar’, in Journal of the History of Economic Thought, 37(4), pp. 615–623.Google Scholar
Signorino, R. (2000) ‘Method and Analysis in Piero Sraffa’s 1925 Critique of Marshallian Economics’, in European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, 7(4), pp. 569–594.Google Scholar
Signorino, R. (2001) ‘An Appraisal of Piero Sraffa’s The Laws of Returns under Competitive Conditions’, in European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, 8(2), pp. 230–250.Google Scholar
Signorino, R. (2003a) ‘Rational vs Historical Reconstructions: A Note on Blaug’, in The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, 10(2), pp. 329–338.Google Scholar
Signorino, R. (2003b) ‘A Rejoinder’, in The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, 10(4), pp. 609–610.Google Scholar
Snowdon, B. and Vane, H. R. (2005) Modern Macroeconomics: Its Origins, Development and Current State, Cheltenham and Northampton, Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Sraffa, P. (1925 [1998]). ‘Sulle relazioni fra costo e quantità prodotta’, in Annali di Economia, 2, pp. 277–328. English translation by Eatwell, J. and Roncaglia, A. ‘On the Relations between Cost and Quantity Produced’, in Pasinetti, L. L. (ed.) Italian Economic Papers, vol. iii, Bologna, Il Mulino and Oxford, Oxford University Press, pp. 323–363.Google Scholar
Sraffa, P. (1926) ‘The Laws of Returns under Competitive Conditions’, in The Economic Journal, 36(144), pp. 535–550.Google Scholar
Sraffa, P. (1930) ‘“A Criticism; Rejoinder”, (Contributions to the Symposium on “Increasing Returns and the Representative Firm”)’, in The Economic Journal, 40(157), pp. 89–93.Google Scholar
Sraffa, P. (1932a) ‘Dr. Hayek on Money and Capital’, in The Economic Journal, 42(165), pp. 42–53.Google Scholar
- 1
- Cited by