Has anyone even heard about the debate between John Kay and others:
 

There is an interesting paper by Paul Davidson as a response which I think 
merits attention fromheterodox economists.

He starts by saying:

Kay attempts to explain why mainstream economic theory does not provide a 
"science" approach to learning about the economic world in which we live. Kay 
indicates that the claim by mainstream economists’s (e.g., Lucas, Cochrane) for 
rigor, consistency, and mathematics in economics has created the basis for the 
low reputation of economists - especially since the financial crash of 2008 was 
not foreseen by their theory.  
John Kay’s argument suggests that the love of rigor and mathematics and the use 
of computer models has encouraged the use of efficient market theory. Whether 
they declare themselves Monetarists, Rational Expectation theorists, 
Neoclassical Synthesis [Old] Keynesians or New Keynesians, the backbone of 
their theories is the efficient market analysis where the future can be known. 
David Barkin
Mexico
Institute for New Economic Thinking  published a paper, written by John Kay, 
that deals with the relationship between economics and the world we live in. 
The Map Is Not the Territory : An Essay on the State of Economics spells out 
methodological critiques of economic theory in general, and of DSGE models and 
rational expectations in particular. 
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l

Reply via email to