Re: Minsky, FIH, and stability

[Alan Isaac <AISAAC@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Perhaps it would help to begin by reviewing why concepts of
equilibrium and homeostasis are considered useful in biology,
physiology, ecology, etc.

An interest in equilibrium is not equivalent to an obsession with
the long run.

On Sun, 16 Jan 1994 18:08:19 -0700 Brad Cox @ GMU/PSOL said:
>lwray@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Randy Wray) wrote:
>
>>Paul Davidson commented that if one accepts Minsky's FIH (or the view
>>that capitalist economies are fundamentally unstable), then one must
>>either advocate free markets or overthrow capitalism. I am sure Paul
>>just means to be provocative.
>
>I find such interest in stability and equilibrium totally mystifying.
>Living systems are fundamentally unstable, tending towards the equilibrium
>known as death.
>
>Someone, please explain. I'm honestly bewildered at why this
>stability/equilibrium stuff has such appeal, even to the point that it
>would be seriously put forth in an argument such as above.
>
>--
>Brad Cox; bcox@xxxxxxx; 703 968 8229 Voice 703 968 8798 Fax
>George Mason Program on Social and Organizational Learning
>
>
>