Changing definitions: a comment on Davidson's critique of King's history of Post Keynesianism

Marc Lavoie

Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, 2005, vol. 27, issue 3, 371-376

Abstract: In a review of John King's book, Paul Davidson has argued that King had been in error when including Sraffians and Kaleckians in his Post Keynesian classification. Davidson seems to believe that Post Keynesianism should be restricted to Fundamental Keynesianism. It is shown that King followed the taxonomy proposed by Davidson in the 1970s and early 1980s. Hence, Davidson cannot blame King for using these definitions. The paper concludes by claiming that despite their idiosyncrasies, heterodox theories contain a large amount of commonalities that ought to be underlined.

Date: 2005
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (7)

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/01603477.2005.11051449 (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
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:27:y:2005:i:3:p:371-376

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

DOI: 10.1080/01603477.2005.11051449

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 ().