The Principle of Concomitance: The Foundation of Continuity, Equilibrium, and Explanatory Theory

1 Reply

Contents

  • .1. Concomitance and Correlation in Macroeconomic Field theory
  • .2. Five Notes re Abstraction; Abstraction is Enriching
  • .3. Resume Focus on Concomitance and Correlation in Macroeconomic Field Theory

.1. Concomitance and Correlation in Macroeconomic Field theory

Concomitance is, I would claim, the key word in Lonergan’s economic thinking. [Philip McShane, [Fusion 1, page 4 ftnt 10]

 All science begins from particular correlations, but the key discovery is the interdependence of the whole.…its basic terms are defined by their functional relations. [CWL 15, 53, 54, and 177]

(Continue reading)

 

1 thought on “The Principle of Concomitance: The Foundation of Continuity, Equilibrium, and Explanatory Theory”

  1. Catherine King

    I inadvertently placed my comment about THIS note in the comments section of the other note. Here is my one comment copied over now to this note’s comments section. Sorry for the error.

    Hello Editors:

    Though I have studied Lonergan’s work for a long time, economics (and Lonergan’s economics) is not my focus. That said, I do keep up a cursory reading of your notes and efforts to purvey his important work. In that vein, I do have a couple of first thought comments on your last note about principles . . . which I have not finished yet, but which are only generated from my sincere interest in that purveyance:

    (1) In my view, your longer paragraph on principles needs clarity, and even perhaps a diagram to help sort out the distinctions there?

    (2) you “dropping in” the term “primal” is off-putting (it jumped off the page for me) and (unless I missed it) needs an earlier and/or technical definition?

    (3) It seems unclear to me when you offer brief numbered statements whether they are (a) editors’ paraphrases, (b) Lonergan quotes, or (c) McShane quotes. To me, some copy-editing clarity there would be helpful.

    (4) About (c) above, please know I have good and documented reasons to have my doubts about McShane’s comments about anything to do with foundations; though, I am also quite aware of his many good contributions to teaching philosophy and to the purveyance of Lonergan’s work. So, to me, the clarity on quotes and/or paraphrases is doubly important.

    Keep up the good work,

    Catherine Blanche King
    cb-king1@live.com

    Reply ↓

Leave a Reply