Thanks for reading my blog post and responding specifically to the points I raised there.
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 1:11 PM, Shane Mage <[email protected]> wrote: > > In "*Ceteris paribus*, Dr. Jekyll tans his own Hyde > <http://ecologicalheadstand.blogspot.com/2014/09/ceteris-paribus-dr-jekyll-tans-his-own.html>" > I review some recent discussion of the *ceteris paribus* clause and > re-examine the role of the ambiguous clause in the debate between Thornton > and Cairnes over the wages-fund doctrine. > > > > the meaning of "*ceteris paribus" *is "abstracting from all factors not > specified." Nothing else. No ambiguity whatsoever. Every scientist knows > that causation is multivariate and that the scientific analysis of any real > situation requires dropping the initial abstraction and incorporating all > the actually relevant variables. When Marx developed such crucial > theoretical concepts as "price of production" and "falling tendency of the > rate of profit" he made it very explicit that these were *ceteris paribus > *propositions and that the other essential factors were to be examined > under the rubrics of "Competition" and "Counteracting Causes." Abstraction > is as basic to economics as it is to any other science. > > > > > > Shane Mage > > "scientific discovery is basically recognition of obvious realities > that self-interest or ideology have kept everybody from paying attention > to" > > > _______________________________________________ > pen-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l > > -- Cheers, Tom Walker (Sandwichman)
_______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
