 On the Capital Controversies as a Choice of ParadigmsRamiro E. Álvarez () and
Jose A. Pérez-Montiel ()
Chapter Chapter 10 in Science, Technology and Innovation in the History of Economic Thought, 2023, pp 207-228 from Palgrave Macmillan Abstract: Abstract In economics, the conventional (also called neoclassical or marginalist) theory is characterised as a framework based on demand and supply functions to explain prices, exchanged/produced quantities and remuneration rates of productive factors. This theory had to face a huge opposition during the 1950s and 1960s, during the Capital Debates or Cambridge-Cambridge Controversies (CCC). This chapter studies how the CCC arose and evolved, as well as how they apparently came to an end in the 1960s and have now been forgotten. To this end, our research makes use of Thomas S. Kuhn’s characterisation of the history of scientific thought, by presenting the debate as a real choice between paradigms. We shall see how answers to the question of why the CCC did not lead to a Scientific Revolution that would bring about the demise of the neoclassical hegemony in economic theory fall outside the logical rigour of the competing theories and reflect the inherent circularity of the communication between different economic paradigms. Date: 2023 There are no downloads for this item, see the EconPapers FAQ for hints about obtaining it. Related works: Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:pal:pshchp:978-3-031-40139-8_10 Ordering information: This item can be ordered from DOI: 10.1007/978-3-031-40139-8_10 Access Statistics for this chapter More chapters in Palgrave Studies in the History of Economic Thought from Palgrave Macmillan |
Is your work missing from RePEc? Here is how to contribute.
Questions or problems? Check the EconPapers FAQ or send mail to .
EconPapers is hosted by the
School of Business at Örebro University.