Is "mathematical science" an oxymoron when used to describe economics?

Paul Davidson

Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, 2003, vol. 25, issue 4, 527-545

Abstract: This paper interprets Weintraub's book, How Economics Became a Mathematical Science, to suggest why Keynes's General Theory has never had any real impact on the theories and models proposed by rigorous mainstream economic theorists. What is meant by "rigor" and "proof" in mathematical analysis? Mathematicians' and economists' views about these concepts keep changing. Debreu taught economists about axiomatics, formalism, and rigor as the Bourbaki mathematicians reconstructed the meaning of these terms. As a result, mainstream economic theory has lost any connection with the real world. Weintraub's analysis shows that the mathematical scientist emperor of mainstream economics is without clothes.

Date: 2003
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (3)

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/01603477.2003.11051376 (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
Chapter: Is “Mathematical Science” an Oxymoron When Used to Describe Economics? (2007)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:mes:postke:v:25:y:2003:i:4:p:527-545

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/MPKE20

DOI: 10.1080/01603477.2003.11051376

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Journal of Post Keynesian Economics from Taylor & Francis Journals
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Chris Longhurst ().