Fellows, Jeffrey wrote:
> ----------
> From: michael perelman
>
> >>>Nobody, absolutely nobody, could refute any neo-classical theory to
> the
> satisfaction of the neo-classical economists.<<<<
Except there have been cases where neoclassical economists were convinced, and ceased being neoclassical economists. And there are cases where they have actually conceded refutation, but argued that either the entirety of neoclassical theory isn't refuted, just part of it, or came up with something to replace that part, or thought the implications weren't as devastating as those who made the critique (to the theory as a whole). But the most interesting phenomenon has been recognizing a refutation or valid critique, and then proceeding to ignore it. Proceed as if nothing ever happened. Don't teach it, don't hire people who do, don't publish people who talk about it, don't mention it ever existed. But anybody can go back and look up Samuelson's "A Summing Up" in the Quarterly Journal or RES (whichever?) where he admits Cambridge US was defeated and the other side was right.
Mat