Neoclassical Tautologies and the Cambridge Controversies: Reply

Citation

Dow S (1982) Neoclassical Tautologies and the Cambridge Controversies: Reply. Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, 5 (1), pp. 132-134. http://www.jstor.org/stable/4537721

Abstract
First paragraph: Andrea Salanti argues that it is the failure of the Cambridge School to put forward an appealing alternative paradigm which explains the absence of a revolution following the Cambridge controversies, in spite of the fact that the controversies had highlighted the inability of the neoclassical paradigm to produce refutable hypotheses. This argument is juxtaposed to my own, expressed in Dow (1980), that the Cambridge School alternative paradigm, expressed in terms of its own methodology, was not effectively promoted by an attack on the neoclassical paradigm which was expressed in terms of neoclassical methodology.

Journal
Journal of Post Keynesian Economics: Volume 5, Issue 1