The (confused) state of equilibrium analysis in modern economics: an explanation

Tony Lawson ()

Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, 2005, vol. 27, issue 3, 423-444

Abstract: Modern economics produces many interpretations of the category of equilibrium as well as competing views of its relevance or worth for economic theorizing. In particular, interpretations and valuations often differ systematically between mainstream and heterodox contributions. I argue that these differences are best explained through understanding the competing ontological presuppositions of the mainstream and heterodox traditions. If correct, this explanation reinforces the assessment advanced elsewhere (Lawson, 2003) that mainstream and heterodox traditions are best distinguished not according to substantive claims or policy stances but rather precisely in terms of their ontological commitments.

Date: 2005
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (11)

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/01603477.2005.11051442 (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:423-444

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

DOI: 10.1080/01603477.2005.11051442

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 ().