>It is curious how little notice Duesnberry's book is given. For mine, it >destroys the whole neo-classical analysis once and for all. (One of many such >destructions that have had no discernible result.)
Only in so far as the NCs believe their own hype regarding the status of neoclassical economics as an axiomatic theory based on von Neumann/Morgenstern utility theory. Most of the important results of neoclassical economics were derived utterly independently of this axiomatisation and don't depend on any homoeconomicus assumption, for all that both defenders and critics say that they do. Might I second Michael's endorsement of "Machine Dreams" by Philip Mirsowski on this subject; I've just started reading it and it's fantastic. dd ___________________________________________________ Email Disclaimer This communication is for the attention of the named recipient only and should not be passed on to any other person. Information relating to any company or security, is for information purposes only and should not be interpreted as a solicitation or offer to buy or sell any security. The information on which this communication is based has been obtained from sources we believe to be reliable, but we do not guarantee its accuracy or completeness. All expressions of opinion are subject to change without notice. All e-mail messages, and associated attachments, are subject to interception and monitoring for lawful business purposes. ___________________________________________________
