[OPE-L:3935] Re: Re: Marxists AND Sraffians Misinterpreting Sraffa

From: Steve Keen (s.keen@uws.edu.au)
Date: Sat Sep 30 2000 - 21:09:35 EDT

OK Andrew,

I'll see if I can live up to that. I might add that it would be quite
possible to characterise my approach to Marx as "temporal single system"
too--since I don't see value and price categories as independent (let alone
see value as superfluous), and all my mathematical work is in dynamics.
Where I differ, of course, is on the premise that labor is the only source
of value.

At 02:01 PM 9/30/00 -0400, you wrote:
>In OPE-L 3905, Steve Keen wrote:
>: However, one side effect of this is that I am also a stickler for doing
>: dynamics properly. I have grave doubts that TSS would pass this test; I
>: will confirm or rebut that opinion after reading Andrew's 1999 ROPE
>: and the 1996 Freeman/Carchedi book, however--I don't see any point in
>: debating this issue just yet.
>OK.  All I will ask is that you evaluate the examples, demonstrations,
>etc. in terms of their aims and results as stated in the texts.  A
>frequent criticism is that various works in the temporal single-system
>interpretation of Marx's value theory are bad models, not really dynamic
>models, poorly constructed dynamic models, etc.  Such criticisms miss the
>mark, because what are construed to be models are not in fact models.  If
>one is attempting to prove possibility where impossibility has been
>alleged, or non-necessity where necessity has been alleged, then even one
>single counterexample, no matter how contrived and unrealistic, is
>sufficient.  Generally, it is counterexamples of this sort that have been
>misconstrued as models.
>The underlying reason for the misattribution is this.
>Simultaneist-physicalists have a single theory.  Therefore, any
>differences between them with rerspect to conclusions stem from
>differences in their models (i.e., assumptions).  They have assumed that
>this must also be true of TSS works, so they criticize the conclusions by
>criticizing the particular assumptions of the "models" (examples,
>illustrations).  But our conclusions in fact differ from their own
>conclusions under almost any assumptions, any "models," because the
>*theory* of determination of value is different.
>Andrew Kliman
Dr. Steve Keen
Senior Lecturer
Economics & Finance
University of Western Sydney Macarthur
Building 11 Room 30,
Goldsmith Avenue, Campbelltown
PO Box 555 Campbelltown NSW 2560
s.keen@uws.edu.au 61 2 4620-3016 Fax 61 2 4626-6683
Home 02 9558-8018 Mobile 0409 716 088
Home Page: http://bus.macarthur.uws.edu.au/steve-keen/

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Oct 31 2000 - 00:00:07 EST