[OPE-L:5131] Re: Re: comparative statics

["Gerald_A_Levy" <Gerald_A_Levy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Re [5128] and [5130]:

Comparative statics or what?  It seems to me that
there is a lot more talk about dynamic (and chaotic)
theories and models than actual dynamic (and
chaotic) models: it is easy to say that one needs
dynamic analysis, it is harder to do it.

I asked a related question in [OPE-L:4960]
on "dynamic and chaotic systems": namely, I asked
anyone to specify the *formal characteristics* of
dynamic systems and chaotic systems.  Since
nobody answered that question it was hard to move
on to what would have been my next question:
which (if any) Marxist theories and models could be
said to be truly dynamic models and which could
be said to be chaotic models?

Let me be clear here. I am not asking whether a
theory is consistent with the *possibility* of dynamic
and chaotic modeling. I think that begs the question.
I am asking whether a theory is actually *in a formal sense*  dynamic, etc.
Until one can answer that, then
all the talk against comparative statics is just talk, imo.


In solidarity, Jerry