Buy Used
£2.11
+ £2.80 UK delivery
Used: Good | Details
Sold by owlsmart_usa
Condition: Used: Good
Comment: Giving great service since 2004: Buy from the Best! 4,000,000 items shipped to delighted customers. We have 1,000,000 unique items ready to ship! Find your Great Buy today!
Trade in your item
Get a £0.81
Gift Card.
Have one to sell?
Flip to back Flip to front
Listen Playing... Paused   You're listening to a sample of the Audible audio edition.
Learn more
See this image

Debunking Economics: The Naked Emperor of the Social Sciences Paperback – 1 Jul 2001


See all 3 formats and editions Hide other formats and editions
Amazon Price New from Used from
Paperback, 1 Jul 2001
£18.50 £2.11


Trade In this Item for up to £0.81
Trade in Debunking Economics: The Naked Emperor of the Social Sciences for an Amazon Gift Card of up to £0.81, which you can then spend on millions of items across the site. Trade-in values may vary (terms apply). Learn more

Product details

  • Paperback: 352 pages
  • Publisher: Zed Books Ltd (1 July 2001)
  • Language: English
  • ISBN-10: 1856499928
  • ISBN-13: 978-1856499927
  • Product Dimensions: 23.7 x 2 x 22.9 cm
  • Average Customer Review: 4.1 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (7 customer reviews)
  • Amazon Bestsellers Rank: 115,735 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
  • See Complete Table of Contents

More About the Authors

Discover books, learn about writers, and more.

Product Description

Review

"'Debunking Economics... will transform the way economics is taught and thought.' - Jan Otto Andersson, Professor of Economics, Abo Akademi University, Finland"

About the Author

Dr STEVE KEEN is an economist at the University of Western Sydney, Australia. He has written widely on economics and finance in academic journals and for the Australian media. His most recent edited publication is Commerce, Complexity and Evolution (Cambridge University Press, 2000).

Inside This Book (Learn More)
First Sentence
Why have we handed over the running of the world to economists? Read the first page
Explore More
Concordance
Browse Sample Pages
Front Cover | Copyright | Table of Contents | Excerpt | Index | Back Cover
Search inside this book:

Customer Reviews

4.1 out of 5 stars
Share your thoughts with other customers

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

10 of 10 people found the following review helpful By M. A. Krul on 11 May 2009
Format: Paperback
For people, like me, who had almost given up entirely on the academic field of Economics when I first started reading on the topic because of ridiculous theories and poor teaching, there is fortunately still Steve Keen. In this book, the Australian Keen shows the errors of the standard views of neoclassical (orthodox) economics.

Not just some side aspects of the theory, but the actual core views of economics as it is taught in universities everywhere unravels before your eyes. Keen masterfully applies both economic models and historical analysis to show that orthodox economists not only do not know what theories exist in their own field, but they also have no inkling of the history of economics and what this means for their approach. This, combined with a possibly even poorer understanding of the philosophy of science (Keen uses Milton Friedman as the main example, but more could have been named), leads to a series of ridiculous assumptions and even more ridiculous results. That the economists consistently ignore the way industrial managers and market analysts etc. do NOT apply their pet theories is just the icing on the cake.

The book is heavy reading for those with no knowledge of economics or maths, but certainly not impossible. A basic understanding of economics and mathematics as taught at high school level (at least in The Netherlands) goes a long way, and Keen fortunately writes well and attempts to avoid long mathematical proofs as much as possible.

The only downside to the book is that his treatment of alternative theories, especially the quite closely linked Austrian school of economics, is very short and vague, and his criticism of Marxist economics is incompetent and useless, done from a Sraffian perspective. This leads to the impression that Keen knows what's wrong with neoclassics, but not what is to be done instead. Therefore, start by reading this book, but don't end there.
5 Comments Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Sending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback. If this review is inappropriate, please let us know.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again
6 of 8 people found the following review helpful By Gareth Greenwood on 7 Mar. 2010
Format: Paperback Verified Purchase
Many years ago while I was studying economics, our tutor group was set an exercise framed as, "given that a firm's cumulative cost/output curve is S-shaped, show that it's average cost vurve is U-shaped". As a mathematics major I chafed at the lack of rigour in the terms "S-shaped" and "U-shaped" and set out to demonstrate that what I was asked to show was not true.

A polite request to my applied maths tutor elicited an old handbook of mathematical functions written in Polish. The Polish was no problem, since I could find what I wanted from the mathematical notation alone. Soon I found a curve based on two exponential functions, each with a parameter. By tweaking the parameters I could generate different S-shaped curves, two of which were of interest. Taking each as a cumulative cost curve, it was easy to show that one led to an average-cost curve that was downward-sloping over most of its domain while the other was upward-sloping over the same domain. Moreover, variation of the parameters enabled me to make the domains of positive or negative average cost curve slope as long as I wished. My conclusion was that what I was asked to prove could easily be false in many practical cases. This attracted the wrath of my economics tutor who duly berated me for being too cocky - and shortly after that I dropped economics as a subject.

Steve Keen's book tells me, after many years, that my scientific instincts about mainstream economics were very well founded. "Debunking Economics" is probably best read in conjunction with a single-volume standard economics textbook. (While I was reading it I referred to "Economics" 3ed by Begg Fisher and Dornbusch.) What Keen shows is that the assumptions unerlying the models used by neoclassical (i.e.
Read more ›
Comment Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Sending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback. If this review is inappropriate, please let us know.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again
1 of 2 people found the following review helpful By Crno Srce on 6 Oct. 2011
Format: Paperback
This review is somewhat late in coming, considering that the second edition of this book has just been launched! However, I imagine that whichever edition you get a chance to read, either will enlighten you. If you've ever suspected that the simplistic assumptions and linear maths which are used to justify the foundation assumptions of modern economic theory are just too simple to be valid or useful, this is the book for you.

My background in engineering taught me that assumptions are at the heart of making models. So far, economics and engineering agree. While the assumptions are valid, the model can be used with some range of accuracy predicted by the model's assumptions. Here, engineering and economics differ greatly. Economics, for example, assumes personal preferences, for example, are independent. In certain limited and specific circumstances which most certainly don't apply to a lot of the real-world, these assumptions could be valid, to a certain degree of accuracy. Economic theory takes this assumption and runs with it, applying it as gospel to every market on earth and aggregates any number of people. Apparently, this nebulous idea of what an individual will do can be just added to that of all other people, with no concept of time, overshoot, etc.

While I had long thought the same, it was nice to read Steve Keen's book and have this confirmed by someone who trained as an economist but somehow didn't swallow the standard story. As such, I'm not sure if it would convince the die-hards. From other comments on this book, full as they are of confused arguments, it seems it would not.

My great bone to pick with this book is that the formulae should really have been presented as such. A formula expressed in english helps no one.
Read more ›
Comment Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Sending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback. If this review is inappropriate, please let us know.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again


Feedback