09.07.2015 Views

Subjectivism and Economic Analysis: Essays in memory of Ludwig ...

Subjectivism and Economic Analysis: Essays in memory of Ludwig ...

Subjectivism and Economic Analysis: Essays in memory of Ludwig ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

THE SUBJECTIVISM OF ACTIVE MINDSexpectations fit together. This complementarity is a strength <strong>of</strong>the theory. Keynes’s treatment <strong>of</strong> long-run expectations runsmostly <strong>in</strong> terms <strong>of</strong> psychological expectations. It is not clear, <strong>in</strong>his analysis, what <strong>in</strong>stitutional properties <strong>of</strong> asset marketsencourage the perversities he identifies <strong>and</strong> what propertiesdiscourage them. (Keynes refers only to liquidity.) Rationalexpectations models refer, presumably, to dispositionalexpectations. They seem to imply that psychologicalexpectations are perfectly plastic, tak<strong>in</strong>g on whatever form isneeded to generate the predicted behaviour. As Thomas Sargenthas noted, this may imply that economic agents know withcerta<strong>in</strong>ty the very structural parameters <strong>of</strong> the economy thateconometricians can only estimate with uncerta<strong>in</strong>ty (Sargent1993:21). The examples <strong>of</strong> Keynes <strong>and</strong> rational expectationshelp to show that we should prefer economic arguments thatcomb<strong>in</strong>e <strong>and</strong> correlate plausible treatments <strong>of</strong> both psychological<strong>and</strong> dispositional expectations.Dist<strong>in</strong>guish<strong>in</strong>g dispositional <strong>and</strong> psychological expectationshelps us to see how we might fit Schutz <strong>and</strong> Hayek <strong>in</strong>to a consistenttheory <strong>of</strong> expectations. The Big Players theory suggests the utility <strong>of</strong>do<strong>in</strong>g so. The proposed <strong>in</strong>tegration seems to yield testablehypotheses. It may be true, then, that <strong>in</strong>tegrat<strong>in</strong>g Schutz <strong>and</strong> Hayekwill help to solve the Lachmann problem.ConclusionThe Lachmann problem was stated at least as early as 1943. For themost part it has rema<strong>in</strong>ed unsolved. Some progress has been madeby Lachmann <strong>and</strong> others through the recognition <strong>of</strong> theco-ord<strong>in</strong>ative function <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutions, ‘nodal po<strong>in</strong>ts’ <strong>of</strong>co-ord<strong>in</strong>ation as Lachmann called them. But much rema<strong>in</strong>s to bedone. I conjecture that this <strong>in</strong>tractability has been due <strong>in</strong> part to atendency by researchers follow<strong>in</strong>g Lachmann to look for eitherKeynesian or Misesian solutions. If <strong>in</strong>stead we try to placeconsiderations <strong>of</strong> anonymity raised by Schutz <strong>in</strong> a Hayekian context<strong>of</strong> social evolution, we may make more progress.AcknowledgementsI thank William Butos for useful comments. Any deficiencies <strong>of</strong> thetext are my fault.77

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!