History and equilibrium: A partial defense of equilibrium economics

Journal of Economic Methodology 11 (3):291-305 (2004)

Abstract

This paper responds to the argument, made by many heterodox economists, that equilibrium theory should be abandoned in favor of theories that pay more attention to history. It considers some of the main ways in which the concept of equilibrium has been understood in economics, and the reasons why there has been confusion in discussions of equilibrium. The conclusion is drawn that the focus should be less on equilibrium as a concept than on equilibrium analysis as a method, and limited defense of this method is offered.

Download options

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 72,879

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2012-02-20

Downloads
41 (#281,004)

6 months
1 (#386,001)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Roger E. Backhouse
Erasmus University Rotterdam

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references

Similar books and articles

On the Inconsistency of Equilibrium Refinement.Werner Güth - 2002 - Theory and Decision 53 (4):371-392.
Decisions, Games and Equilibrium Solutions.William Harper - 1988 - PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1988:344 - 362.
Boltzmann, Gibbs, and the Concept of Equilibrium.David A. Lavis - 2008 - Philosophy of Science 75 (5):682-696.