亚当·斯密-约翰·梅纳德·凯恩斯的三个基本公理与杰里米·边沁及其学生的三个基本公理(里卡多、萨伊、詹姆斯·米尔斯、J·S·米尔斯、西尼尔、瓦尔拉斯和马歇尔)的决策方法

M. E. Brady
{"title":"亚当·斯密-约翰·梅纳德·凯恩斯的三个基本公理与杰里米·边沁及其学生的三个基本公理(里卡多、萨伊、詹姆斯·米尔斯、J·S·米尔斯、西尼尔、瓦尔拉斯和马歇尔)的决策方法","authors":"M. E. Brady","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3311997","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Adam Smith and J M Keynes were both practitioners of virtue ethics who rejected Benthamite Utilitarianism. Their axiomatic foundations consist of the following three axioms only. The first is that probabilities are nonadditive, in general. Additivity is a special case. The second is that probability preferences are generally nonlinear. Linearity is a special case. The third axiom, which follows from the first two, is that the relevant information, data, evidence or the knowledge base required in order to make decisions is generally incomplete. A State of completeness of the relevant information, data, evidence or knowledge base is a special case. The axiomatic structure of Benthamite Utilitarianism is practically identical to that which underlies the Rational Expectations-Real Business Cycle – Dynamic Stochastic General Equilibrium approaches. Bentham’s first axiom was that all probabilities (“uncertainties”) were numerical and additive. Bentham’s second axiom was that all probability preferences were linear. The whole is nothing more than the individual sum of each part. The third axiom was that all the relevant information, data, evidence or knowledge base is complete, so that individual decision makers can make rational (optimal) decisions in both the short run and long run. Based on these three axioms, Bentham asserted that all rational decision makers would be able to actually maximize utility and returns as long as government would “be quit” and “stay out of the sunlight” of businessmen .The normal result would be that an economy would always be operating on the boundary of the Production Possibilities Frontier unless an external shock (war, revolution, plague, etc.) occurred. Smith and Keynes’s axioms are more general than those of Jeremy Bentham and his students. It is impossible to maximize utility or profits, in general, for Smith and Keynes, except as a very special case. \n \nThe only conclusion possible is that the Rational Expectations-Real Business Cycle – Dynamic Stochastic General Equilibrium approaches are all very special cases of the more generalized Smith – Keynes axiom set. \n \nKeynes did exactly what he said he would do in the General Theory on page 3. He generalized classical and Neoclassical theory by providing a more general axiomatic structure .Modern economists are still working with the special theory of Bentham.","PeriodicalId":253619,"journal":{"name":"History of Economics eJournal","volume":"28 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-01-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Three Basic Axioms of the Adam Smith-John Maynard Keynes Approach to Decision Making Versus the Three Basic Axioms of Jeremy Bentham and His students (Ricardo, Say, James Mills, J S Mills, Senior, Walras, and Marshall) Approach to Decision Making\",\"authors\":\"M. E. Brady\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.3311997\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Adam Smith and J M Keynes were both practitioners of virtue ethics who rejected Benthamite Utilitarianism. Their axiomatic foundations consist of the following three axioms only. The first is that probabilities are nonadditive, in general. Additivity is a special case. The second is that probability preferences are generally nonlinear. Linearity is a special case. The third axiom, which follows from the first two, is that the relevant information, data, evidence or the knowledge base required in order to make decisions is generally incomplete. A State of completeness of the relevant information, data, evidence or knowledge base is a special case. The axiomatic structure of Benthamite Utilitarianism is practically identical to that which underlies the Rational Expectations-Real Business Cycle – Dynamic Stochastic General Equilibrium approaches. Bentham’s first axiom was that all probabilities (“uncertainties”) were numerical and additive. Bentham’s second axiom was that all probability preferences were linear. The whole is nothing more than the individual sum of each part. The third axiom was that all the relevant information, data, evidence or knowledge base is complete, so that individual decision makers can make rational (optimal) decisions in both the short run and long run. Based on these three axioms, Bentham asserted that all rational decision makers would be able to actually maximize utility and returns as long as government would “be quit” and “stay out of the sunlight” of businessmen .The normal result would be that an economy would always be operating on the boundary of the Production Possibilities Frontier unless an external shock (war, revolution, plague, etc.) occurred. Smith and Keynes’s axioms are more general than those of Jeremy Bentham and his students. It is impossible to maximize utility or profits, in general, for Smith and Keynes, except as a very special case. \\n \\nThe only conclusion possible is that the Rational Expectations-Real Business Cycle – Dynamic Stochastic General Equilibrium approaches are all very special cases of the more generalized Smith – Keynes axiom set. \\n \\nKeynes did exactly what he said he would do in the General Theory on page 3. He generalized classical and Neoclassical theory by providing a more general axiomatic structure .Modern economists are still working with the special theory of Bentham.\",\"PeriodicalId\":253619,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"History of Economics eJournal\",\"volume\":\"28 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-01-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"History of Economics eJournal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3311997\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"History of Economics eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3311997","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

亚当·斯密和凯恩斯都是德性伦理学的实践者,他们都反对边沁功利主义。它们的公理基础仅由以下三个公理组成。首先,一般来说,概率是不可加的。可加性是一个特例。其次,概率偏好通常是非线性的。线性是一个特例。第三个公理是由前两个公理推导出来的,即决策所需的相关信息、数据、证据或知识库通常是不完整的。有关资料、数据、证据或知识库的完备状态是一种特殊情况。边沁功利主义的公理结构实际上与理性预期-真实商业周期-动态随机一般均衡方法的基础相同。边沁的第一个公理是所有的概率(“不确定性”)都是数值和可加性的。边沁的第二个公理是所有的概率偏好都是线性的。整体不过是各部分的单独总和。第三个公理是,所有相关的信息、数据、证据或知识库都是完整的,从而使个体决策者能够在短期和长期内做出理性(最优)决策。基于这三个公理,边沁断言,只要政府“退出”并“远离商人的阳光”,所有理性的决策者都能够实现效用和回报的最大化。正常的结果是,除非发生外部冲击(战争、革命、瘟疫等),否则经济将始终在生产可能性边界的边界上运行。斯密和凯恩斯的公理比杰里米·边沁及其学生的公理更普遍。一般来说,对斯密和凯恩斯来说,效用或利润最大化是不可能的,除非是非常特殊的情况。唯一可能的结论是,理性预期-真实商业周期-动态随机一般均衡方法都是更广义的史密斯-凯恩斯公理集的非常特殊的情况。凯恩斯做了他在《通论》第三页说过的事。他通过提供一个更普遍的公理结构来概括古典和新古典理论。现代经济学家仍在研究边沁的特殊理论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Three Basic Axioms of the Adam Smith-John Maynard Keynes Approach to Decision Making Versus the Three Basic Axioms of Jeremy Bentham and His students (Ricardo, Say, James Mills, J S Mills, Senior, Walras, and Marshall) Approach to Decision Making
Adam Smith and J M Keynes were both practitioners of virtue ethics who rejected Benthamite Utilitarianism. Their axiomatic foundations consist of the following three axioms only. The first is that probabilities are nonadditive, in general. Additivity is a special case. The second is that probability preferences are generally nonlinear. Linearity is a special case. The third axiom, which follows from the first two, is that the relevant information, data, evidence or the knowledge base required in order to make decisions is generally incomplete. A State of completeness of the relevant information, data, evidence or knowledge base is a special case. The axiomatic structure of Benthamite Utilitarianism is practically identical to that which underlies the Rational Expectations-Real Business Cycle – Dynamic Stochastic General Equilibrium approaches. Bentham’s first axiom was that all probabilities (“uncertainties”) were numerical and additive. Bentham’s second axiom was that all probability preferences were linear. The whole is nothing more than the individual sum of each part. The third axiom was that all the relevant information, data, evidence or knowledge base is complete, so that individual decision makers can make rational (optimal) decisions in both the short run and long run. Based on these three axioms, Bentham asserted that all rational decision makers would be able to actually maximize utility and returns as long as government would “be quit” and “stay out of the sunlight” of businessmen .The normal result would be that an economy would always be operating on the boundary of the Production Possibilities Frontier unless an external shock (war, revolution, plague, etc.) occurred. Smith and Keynes’s axioms are more general than those of Jeremy Bentham and his students. It is impossible to maximize utility or profits, in general, for Smith and Keynes, except as a very special case. The only conclusion possible is that the Rational Expectations-Real Business Cycle – Dynamic Stochastic General Equilibrium approaches are all very special cases of the more generalized Smith – Keynes axiom set. Keynes did exactly what he said he would do in the General Theory on page 3. He generalized classical and Neoclassical theory by providing a more general axiomatic structure .Modern economists are still working with the special theory of Bentham.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信