Why was the Antinomy Theory of Harrod's Dynamics Lost?
スポンサーリンク
概要
- 論文の詳細を見る
Harrod's Dynamics represented a methodological revolution because his trade cycle theory not only connects multiplier and relation (acceleration) with each other, but also rejects the explanation of trade cycle by sequence of temporary equilibrium. Harrod showed the originality of his dynamics as the difference between lag theory of Samuelson, Hicks, Tinbergen etc. and antinomy theory of his own. But few number of economist understood the essence of his antinomy theory.Baumol, Alexander and many others regarded Harrod's theory as imperfect because his fundamental equation is merely identical equation, therefore it does not determine the behavior of the next moment. They thought the behavioral equation must be added in order to complete Harrod's model.Shackle insisted Harrod's 'one point in time' approach excluded the essential uncertainty in decision-making. Okishio insisted that difference-differential equation is essential for the completion of Harrod's instability principle. Although Besomi, scholar of Harrod's economics, introduces the Harrod's methodology, he also regards the fundamental equation in Harrod's Essay as missing the consideration of expectations.All critics above did not understand that his dynamics represents a direction of the movement at the very moment in time and need not have a behavioral equation. Harrod thought the moment analysis is more important than locus in the time sequence. But they held that the opposite of his intention was true.Despite these critiques I insist that Harrod's antinomy theory is valid and his methodology is very useful. For my conclusion I criticize Okishio model, which is representative interpretation of Harrod's instability principle so far. The model has two behavioral equations for product-decision and investment-decision.Harrod's fundamental equation expresses the antinomy of economic structure, which always exists, by the form of identical equation. Identical equation is objective, valid for qualitative analysis. His objective approach is similar to Keynes's approach which uses the fundamental equation in A Treatise on Money and the instantaneous multiplier in General Theory.Harrod's antinomy theory has been lost because the objective approach to dynamics was not understood. It is to emphasize that the ultimate cause of misunderstandings is a strong leaning toward the micro foundation of modern economics. We incline to start with individually subjective decision-making, not objective structure.
- 経済学史学会の論文
経済学史学会 | 論文
- 機械と身体:経済学的言説におけるレトリックとメタファー
- ハロッドの「経験の原理」と帰納法--ケインズの帰納法と比較して
- 杉原四郎『ミル・マルクス・エンゲルス』世界書院〔含:リプライ〕
- 日本経済思想史研究のこれまでと今 (特集 私の経済学史研究--20世紀の学史研究をふりかえって)
- Shiro Sugihara and Toshihiro Tanaka eds.,Economic Thought and Modernization in Japan,Edward Elgar〔和文,含 リプライ〕