Re: Formalist/mathematical economics

abskebabs — Sun, 07 Jun 2009 19:38:33 GMT

laminustacitus:

For a quick read, I suggest Gary North's "The Theoretical Case Against Curves in Economics".

Thanks for the link! That was most enlightening. Iknew Rothbard used diagrams, and I had wondered why in the back of my mind, though I just assumed it was ok to do so. It's interesting, I study theoretical physics, and even though neoclassicals try to emulate physics, I don't think they employ false assumptions and fictions to the same level of rigour. For example, from the beginning of Lev Landau's "Course of Theoretical Physics Volume 1 Mechanics" he states: "One of the fundamental concepts of mechanics is that of a particle. By this we mean a body whose dimensions may be neglected in describing its motion. The possibility of doing so depends, of course, on the conditions of the problem concerned. For example planets may be regarded as particles in considering their motion about the Sun, but not in considering their rotation about their axes."

Re: Formalist/mathematical economics

laminustacitus — Sun, 07 Jun 2009 17:29:54 GMT

For a quick read, I suggest Gary North's "The Theoretical Case Against Curves in Economics".

Formalist/mathematical economics

tke — Sun, 07 Jun 2009 17:20:48 GMT

Hello,

I need to find the main Austrian arguments against the use of mathematics in economics. What book/article should I read then?

Economics Questions

Re: Formalist/mathematical economics

Re: Formalist/mathematical economics

Formalist/mathematical economics