Axioms and Babylonian thought: a reply
Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, 2005, vol. 27, issue 3, 385-391
Paul Davidson has criticized Babylonian thought as supporting an "anything goes" approach to Post Keynesian economics. This note explains Babylonian thought, not as the dual of classical logic but as another form of logic that is rigorous in light of the nonergodic nature of social systems, and the uncertainty this entails. It is argued that Babylonian thought is one way of understanding Keynes's "ordinary logic," while Davidson's use of the term "axiomatic" appears problematic. But the ergodic axiom is so compatible with the open-systems ontology on which Babylonian thought is based that there is, in fact, scope for broad agreement.
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (10) Track citations by RSS feed
Downloads: (external link)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.
Export reference: BibTeX
RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan)
Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:mes:postke:v:27:y:2005:i:3:p:385-391
Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
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 ().