Re: Economic anamolies and Kuhn
I've also heard that the New Keynesians accept a good deal of what the old Keyneisans and neo-Keynesians rejected, Alypius Skinner wrote: What's the difference between a new Keynesian and a neo-Keynesian? Perhaps a school goes from new to neo- when it becomes `Established'? Is economics suffering from a modifier shortage? After neo- I suggest ter-. -- Anton Sherwood, http://www.ogre.nu/
Re: Economic anamolies and Kuhn
In a message dated 2/1/03 1:42:44 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I've also heard that the New Keynesians accept a good deal of what the old Keyneisans and neo-Keynesians rejected, Alypius Skinner wrote: What's the difference between a new Keynesian and a neo-Keynesian? Perhaps a school goes from new to neo- when it becomes `Established'? When I first took economics back in 1978 the reigning school appeared to have switched from using the unmodified label Keynesian to neo-Keynesian, which mostly seemed to mean that they were trying to use cost-push inflation theory resucitate Keynesian theory from its obvious failure to allow for stagflation. In my PhD Macro class last semester the professor and Snowden's book used the term New Keynesians to refer to the current inheritors of Keyenes. Snowden also uses the term post-Keynesians to describe a somewhat different group. I also recall now that when I took master's level econometrics back in 1990 my instructor, a PhD candidate, called himself a post-Keynesian. He described the difference between a neo-Keynesian this way: where Paul Samuelson had written two cheers, but not three, for free markets in the econ text book I'd used in 1978, the post-Keynesians say, one cheer for free markets. David
RE: Economic anamolies and Kuhn
stagflation. -Original Message- From: fabio guillermo rojas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, January 30, 2003 5:32 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Economic anamolies and Kuhn I'm teaching a course on the sociology of science and we read Kuhn's structure of scientific revolutions. FYI, Kuhn says that science is characterized by paradigms - most science works from basic assumptions justified by model achievements. Scientific change occurs when anamolies - observations contradicting theory - undermine the paradigm and new ideas are adopted. Can someone provide me an example of an anamoly from the recent history of economics that led to a fundamental change in economic theory? Fabio
Economic anamolies and Kuhn
I'm teaching a course on the sociology of science and we read Kuhn's structure of scientific revolutions. FYI, Kuhn says that science is characterized by paradigms - most science works from basic assumptions justified by model achievements. Scientific change occurs when anamolies - observations contradicting theory - undermine the paradigm and new ideas are adopted. Can someone provide me an example of an anamoly from the recent history of economics that led to a fundamental change in economic theory? Fabio
Re: Economic anamolies and Kuhn
Assymetric information? Lemon car markets whatnot? (Signalling models?) How fundamental is fundamental? There is a game theory text that assumes a certain amount of irrational behavior to obtain its results. I can search the closet if you want. Sorry I'm not more helpful, jsh --- fabio guillermo rojas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm teaching a course on the sociology of science and we read Kuhn's structure of scientific revolutions. FYI, Kuhn says that science is characterized by paradigms - most science works from basic assumptions justified by model achievements. Scientific change occurs when anamolies - observations contradicting theory - undermine the paradigm and new ideas are adopted. Can someone provide me an example of an anamoly from the recent history of economics that led to a fundamental change in economic theory? Fabio __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com
