Abstract
In various publications Blaug has upheld the view that Paretian welfare economics is normative, sharply criticising the opposite ‘Archibald-Hennipman argument.’ He has failed to refute this and to defend his position, with the allegation that positive welfare economics cannot exist, convincingly. His reasoning is marred by misunderstandings, inconsistencies, circularities and traces of essentialism. The normative conception is an ambiguous hybrid that cannot fulfil the pretension to offer definite prescriptions. It is advisable to regard allocation theory as belonging to positive economics; its normative application must drop its claim to represent welfare economics as a whole.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
