----------------- HES POSTING ----------------- 
[Moderator: I've almost started new threads several times during this 
discussion, but I haven't seen a clear break in the flow.  With this post, 
I think the conversation is so far removed from the original, that I am 
starting a new thread.  You are always welcome, when you post a message to 
the list, to change the Subject line to indicate a new topic. Also, if you 
received double postings of a recent Scott Cullen message, I apologize. I 
don't know why the list software hiccups like that. HB] 
 
 
In answer to Robin's comment ("Economics advanced when it was generally 
admitted that utility was subjective"): In my view it depends on what you 
mean by "advanced".  In a logical sense, yes that is all true, but if you 
want to conduct policy, some type of interpersonal comparisons are 
necessary, which means that values play a role in all policy discussions, 
and that we have to make sense of utility as something more. Cooter and 
Rapaport in the JEL argued for a materialist welfare intepretation. Pigou 
integrated some of the material welfare judgements into his "welfare 
economics" which he called realistic economics--which he distinguished from 
the science of economics. Robbins said that Pigou's work wasn't science, 
which it wasn't, but it was one way to do policy.  The attempt to do 
economic policy without interpersonal comparisons led economics into a 
sterile welfare economics. We are still trying to get out of it. 
 
Dave Colander  
 
 
------------ FOOTER TO HES POSTING ------------ 
For information, send the message "info HES" to [log in to unmask]