Keynes, Post-Keynesianism and Political Economy: Essays in Honour of Geoff Harcourt, Volume III: 3 (Routledge Frontiers of Political Economy)

You looking to find the "Keynes, Post-Keynesianism and Political Economy: Essays in Honour of Geoff Harcourt, Volume III: 3 (Routledge Frontiers of Political Economy)" Good news! You can purchase Keynes, Post-Keynesianism and Political Economy: Essays in Honour of Geoff Harcourt, Volume III: 3 (Routledge Frontiers of Political Economy) with secure price and compare to view update price on this product. And deals on this product is available only for limited time.

   

Product Description

Geoff Harcourt has had a major impact on the field of Post-Keynesian economics, not only in his research but also in his teaching. Many of Harcourts students have gone on to make valuable contributions in this field. This volume brings together contributions from thirty such former students, now established in academic institutions around the world. Their contributions focus on themes important to Harcourts work, touching upon:
history of political economy
· methodology
· economic theory
applied analysis This work is a valuable addition to the literature of political economy and a fitting tribute to a leading economist.

Keynes, Post-Keynesianism and Political Economy: Essays in Honour of Geoff Harcourt, Volume III: 3 (Routledge Frontiers of Political Economy) Review

The editors and the authors of the essays in this book lack a basic understanding of the fundamental nature of Keynesian probabilities.Keynesian probabilities are primarily interval estimates.Each probability has a lower bound and an upper bound.Interval estimates cause or create the major problems of noncomparability,nonrankability,and incommensurability that Keynes discussed in chapter 3 of the TP.Keynes discussed these problems only in an introductory fashion in chapter 3 of the A Treatise on Probability(1921;TP).On page 37 of the TP, Keynes warned the reader that only after Part II of the TP had been reached and absorbed would his initial discussion of the problem of measuring probabilities be complete.On page 160 of chapter 15 of the TP,Keynes explicitly defines a nonnumerical probability to be"...BETWEEN(Keynes's emphasis)numerical limits".Unfortunately,the editors and authors of the essays in this book have followed F Ramsey,who decided that Keynes's concept of nonnumerical probability meant that, in general,probabilities could not be quantified,the main exception being applications of the principle of indifference to perfectly symmetric evidence.Both of Ramsey's reviews,in 1922 and 1926,make the same error in concluding that Keynes's TP discussion of nonnumerical and/or nonmeasurable probabilities meant that numbers could not be used to estimate probabilities.Ramsey never read chapters 15 and 17 where Keynes developed his"inexact numerical approximation" technique to estimate probability intervals.Baddeley, in essay 10 and DeQuech,in essay 9,follow Ramsey's misinterpretation of Keynes's approach.Ramsey characterized Keynesian probabilities as being "mysterious".On p.203,Baddeley makes the following claim:"His(Keynes's) derivation of this coefficient(the conventional coefficient of weight and risk,c,which solves all of the paradoxes of subjective expected utility theory)seems anomalous given his emphasis on the limits to quantifying probability and weight".Baddeley has it all wrong.Keynes expected the reader of chapters 15 and 17 to be able to take the additional small step in chapter 26 of recognizing that the c coefficient formula is easily and simply applied within his "inexact approximation technique" as an interval estimate.The same approach applies to estimates of the weight of the evidence,w.w can be specified as an interval.Given that c=f(p,w),c is an interval also.Baddeley's error is not surprising given her reliance on the papers of J Runde and B Gerrard.Both Runde and Gerrard accept the Ramsey argument at face value .DeQuech commits the same general error made by Baddeley.Keynesian probabilities are nonnumerical probabilities that involve calculations that have no numbers.Such an approach would indeed be mysterious.It is not Keynes's approach.The Ramsey error appears to have been passed down from one generation of economists and philosophers to another over the last 80 years.Economists and philosophers will make no progress in understanding Keynes's revolutionary,pathbreaking accomplishments in the TP unless until they are able to correct the mistakes and errors which litter both of Ramsey's reviews of the TP.

Most of the consumer Reviews tell that the "Keynes, Post-Keynesianism and Political Economy: Essays in Honour of Geoff Harcourt, Volume III: 3 (Routledge Frontiers of Political Economy)" are high quality item. You can read each testimony from consumers to find out cons and pros from Keynes, Post-Keynesianism and Political Economy: Essays in Honour of Geoff Harcourt, Volume III: 3 (Routledge Frontiers of Political Economy) ...