The Paretian Theory of Ophelimity in Closed and Open Cycles.

Q2 Arts and Humanities

History of Economic Ideas Pub Date : 2006-01-01 DOI:10.1400/77647

Aldo Montesano

引用次数: 12

Abstract

The theory of ophelimity in closed and open cycles proposed by Pareto following Volterra’s observations is examined. Although these were oriented towards identification of the integrability conditions, Pareto shows no interest in them, but in the problem of the measurement of the elementary ophelimities (i.e. of the marginal utilities) starting from the empirical data (of an ideal experiment) represented by the marginal rates of substitution and by the indifference varieties. Pareto examines both the case in which the integrability conditions are satisfied (closed cycle) and that in which they are not satisfied (open cycle) and introduces in both cases some identification conditions for the elementary ophelimities (i.e. conditions sufficient for their measurability starting from the empirical data). These conditions are commented upon and generalised.

查看原文本刊更多论文

封闭循环和开放循环的家长式优势理论。

在沃尔泰拉的观察之后，帕累托提出了闭环和开环的亲极性理论。尽管这些都是为了确定可积性条件，但帕累托对它们不感兴趣，而是对从(理想实验的)经验数据(由边际替代率和无差异变量表示)开始的基本极值(即边际效用)的测量问题感兴趣。Pareto考察了满足可积性条件的情况(闭环)和不满足可积性条件的情况(开环)，并在这两种情况下引入了一些初等极性的识别条件(即从经验数据出发的可测性的充分条件)。对这些条件进行了评论和概括。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

History of Economic Ideas Arts and Humanities-History

CiteScore

0.50

自引率

0.00%

发文量

期刊介绍： History of Economic Ideas is a new international series of Quaderni di storia dell''economia politica, a journal founded in 1983 to promote collaboration between scholars who share an historical approach to the major issues, the various "revolutions" which have left their mark on economics and the spread of economic ideas beyond the narrow circle of specialists. History of Economic Ideas rejects the dichotomy between "analysis" and "culture": both aspects are of equal importance for a wider understanding of the subject. In a period such as our own, where paradigms which once seemed unshakeable are now being challenged, a multidisciplinary analysis of the historical development of economics might contribute to shedding light on the issues at the root of current debate. Besides essays and critical surveys, the journal includes archive material and reviews of new books on history of economics. History of Economic Ideas is double-blind peer reviewed.