Is this article correct about the relationship of
neo-classical economists to 19th century century
physics? I think Lion Walras was more likely Leon!

The economist has no clothes: Unscientific assumptions
in economic theory are undermining efforts to solve
environmental problem - Saturday, April 05, 2008: By
Robert Nadeau for Scientific American Magazine 

The 19th-century creators of neoclassical economics
—the theory that now serves as the basis for
coordinating activities in the global market system —
are credited with transforming their field into a
scientific discipline. But what is not widely known is
that these now legendary economists — William Stanley
Jevons, Lion Walras, Maria Edgeworth and Vilfredo
Pareto — developed their theories by adapting
equations from 19th-century physics that eventually
became obsolete. 

Unfortunately, it is clear that neoclassical economics
has also become outdated. The theory is based on
unscientific assumptions that are hindering the
implementation of viable economic solutions for global
warming and other menacing environmental problems. 

The physical theory that the creators of neoclassical
economics used as a template was conceived in response
to the inability of Newtonian physics to account for
the phenomena of heat, light and electricity. In 1847
German physicist Hermann von Helmholtz formulated the
conservation of energy principle and postulated the
existence of a field of conserved energy that fills
all space and unifies these phenomena. Later in the
century James Maxwell, Ludwig Boltzmann and other
physicists devised better explanations for
electromagnetism and thermodynamics, but in the
meantime, the economists had borrowed and altered
Helmholtzs equations. 

The strategy the economists used was as simple as it
was absurd — they substituted economic variables for
physical ones. Utility (a measure of economic
well-being) took the place of energy; the sum of
utility and expenditure replaced potential and kinetic
energy. A number of well-known mathematicians and
physicists told the economists that there was
absolutely no basis for making these substitutions.
But the economists ignored such criticisms and
proceeded to claim that they had transformed their
field of study into a rigorously mathematical
scientific discipline. 

Strangely enough, the origins of neoclassical
economics in mid-19th century physics were forgotten.
Subsequent generations of mainstream economists
accepted the claim that this theory is scientific.
These curious developments explain why the
mathematical theories used by mainstream economists
are predicated on the following unscientific
assumptions: 

* The market system is a closed circular flow between
production and consumption, with no inlets or outlets.


* Natural resources exist in a domain that is separate
and distinct from a closed market system, and the
economic value of these resources can be determined
only by the dynamics that operate within this
system.... 


  URL1:
Http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=the-economist-has-no-clothes



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by: Penney Kome 



Blog:  http://kenthink7.blogspot.com/index.html
Blog:  http://kencan7.blogspot.com/index.html
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l

Reply via email to