Julio Huato wrote: > > > Uh? I'm not sure what you mean, since a bunch of important economic > results have been derived without having preferences posed as > *functions*. They have been instead postulated as (mathematical) > "relations." Gerard Debreu's proof of general equilibrium introduces, > not a preference- or "utility" function, but a "preference relation" > between sets. It's not even a function, let alone linear.
It seems prima facie absurd that an "economy" capable of being intelligibly grasped in its own terms should exist independently of the whole complex of human relations. It is hence prima facie absurd that mathematics could be of any core relevance to understand those mythical economic relations which have no existence except as embodied in the whole of history. A demonstration of the relevance of mathematics cannot, of course, depend itself on any appeal to mathematics, for that would be a circular argument. Carrol
