Re: Biunvocity: equivalence postulate.

["Harry Veeder" <veed0001@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Title: Re: Biunvocity: equivalence postulate.

Related to this discussion is the difference between an equivalence and an identity.
Sometimes the logic of equivalence gets confused with the logic identity.  
The identity of two things means they have all properties in common,
but the equivalence of two things means they only have properties in common
that have a specific *utility*.

Harry Veeder


----------
From: Greg Nowell <GN842@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: POST-KEYNESIAN THOUGHT <pkt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Biunvocity: equivalence postulate.
Date: Fri, Mar 24, 2000, 9:47 pm

G Nowell:  I received this communication from Bruno Ventelou (for the uninitiated, I am translating his book) regarding his use of the term "biunivocity."  I translated his note below, and would be interested in receiving comments.  -gn.

Ventelou's note:

I think that "equivalence" or "equivalence postulate" is correct for replacing biunivocity.  Keynes is trying to show that reasoning in terms of price distortions on the labor market (chapt 2 of the GT) and that reasoning in terms of effective demand (chapt 3) are "equivalent" (it's the same explanation of unemployment).

There are many specialist debates about this.  Keynes might have erred in affirming this equivalence.  For in fact, the GT has two explanations of unemployment, of which only one, effective demand, is truly original and properly Keynesian.

end quote.

ventelou wrote:
 Je pense que "équivalence" (ou "postulat d'équivalence") est correct pour remplacer biunivocité. Il s'agit ici (pour Keynes) de montrer que le raisonnement en termes de distorsion de prix sur le marché du travail -chapitre 2 de la TG- et le raisonnement en termes de demande effective -chapitre 3- sont "équivalents" (c'est la même explication du chômage). Il y a de nombreux débats (de spécialistes) autour de cette question. Keynes pourrait s'être trompé en affirmant cette équivalence (il y aurait en fait, dans la TG, deux explications du chômage, dont seule la seconde (demande effective) serait véritablement originale et proprement keynésienne). Si tu as du mal avec ce paragraphe, je peux t'aider à le reformuler en anglais. -----Message d'origine-----
De : Greg Nowell <GN842@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:GN842@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >
À : bruno ventelou <bruno.ventelou@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:bruno.ventelou@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >
Date : jeudi 23 mars 2000 12:29
Objet : [Fwd: biunivocity]
 >Bruno est que tu peux me donner un autre mot que
>biunivocity pour utiliser dans le livre?
>
>--
>Gregory P. Nowell
>Associate Professor
>Department of Political Science, Milne 100
>State University of New York
>135 Western Ave.
>Albany, New York 12222
>
>Fax 518-442-5298
>
>
--
Gregory P. Nowell
Associate Professor
Department of Political Science, Milne 100
State University of New York
135 Western Ave.
Albany, New York 12222

Fax 518-442-5298