----------------- HES POSTING ----------------- 
Referring to Pat's view on opportunity cost as the dividing line 
(classical-neoclassical), if this interpretation is right we have to 
conclude that Walras, Pareto or Fisher were not neoclassical or among the 
founders of the neoclassical paradigm, because none of them considered the 
concept of opportunity cost as the central category in their system: I 
would prefer to consider neoclassical economics as a bundle of a few 
methodological elements, where opportunity cost was only an element; 
otherwise we must deduce that the Austrian version of neoclassical 
economics became the mainstream in neoclassical economics: but this is not 
the case, if we consider Arrow, Bedreu, Samuleson, Hicks, Allen as leaders 
representative of neoclassical economics in XX century. 
 
Luigino Bruni 
 
 
------------ FOOTER TO HES POSTING ------------ 
For information, send the message "info HES" to [log in to unmask]