Re: Conflict - Notre Dame and elsewhere

[pdavidso <pdavidso@xxxxxxx>]

>===== Original Message From Tracy Lightcap <tlightcap@xxxxxxxxxxxx> =====
> Freeman Dyson makes a useful distinction
>between what he calls "Athenian" and "Manchesterian" science. For those
>sciences that concern themselves with largely invariant entities that
>aren't effected by historical processes Athenian science is useful.
>Here general abstract theories can be built that lead to deductive
>models testable by experimental methods. Classic physics, chemistry,
>some aspects of the life sciences - all can be approached this way.
>Manchesterian sciences, on the other hand, deal with variable entities
>that are effected by historical processes.


What you are saying is that Athenian science deals with ergodic  processes --
while  Manchesterian science involve nonergodic processes.



I think you can see why focusing on the axiom of whether the science deals
with an ergodic system (as mainstream classical economics does) or nonergodic
processes (as Keynes's GT does) provides a precise taxonomic logical
difference-- and is independent of whether one is dealing with classical
physics or social science.  As I said a number of time, modern physicists
recognize that some aspects of their discipline may be dealing with nonergodic
processes.  --

Paul

Paul Davidson
Editor, Journal of Post Keynesian Economics
University of Tennessee
SMC 503
Knoxville, Tennessee 37996-0550
phone # (561)369-1951; fax #(561)369-1951;
email pdavidson@xxxxxxx
http://econ.bus.utk.edu/davidsonextra/Davidson.html