David Andrews, being so modest, send me this note privately. And I'm putting this on the net without his permission. I hope he is not mad at me for this. >Dear Ajit, > >Generally I'm not one to blow my own horn, but I have a piece called >"Nothing is hidden: A Wittgensteinian interpretation of Sraffa" in the >Cambridge Journal of Economics (vol. 20, no. 6, November 1996, pp. 763-777). >It might possibly be useful for you and in any case I would be very >interested to know what you think of it. > >Best regards, > >David _______________ I have read your paper at least three times, and I think it is a great paper with a lot of interesting insights. For a long time I have been thinking about something which your paper foreshadows. I think there is on purpose no process analysis in Sraffa. Though Sraffa's prices are compatible with the classical notion of gravitational points, there is no mention of gravitational attraction in his writings. So it will be incorrect to say that Sraffian prices are "equilibrium prices" or "stable" prices etc. I intend to develop this theme in the context of Garegnani-Robinson debate. I also think that the idea that "nothing is hidden" and Sraffa's insistence on "objectivity" must be further explored. You give a very interesting and insightful spin to Keynes's well known statement about Sraffa that "from whom nothing is hid". I liked that a lot! Cheers, ajit sinha > > >>I have been reading Wittgenstein's PHILOSOPHICAL INVESTIGATIONS as a >>preparation for my work on "Sraffa's method". > >
