Risk in General Equilibrium: Temporality and Performativity in the Ontology of Finance

2016 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ivan Boldyrev
Keyword(s):  
General Equilibrium ◽  
The Other ◽  
Equilibrium Analysis ◽  
Future Event ◽  
General Equilibrium Analysis ◽  
Fundamental Notion ◽  
Monetary Unit ◽  
The Future ◽  
Arrow Securities ◽  
The One

Abstract:This paper reconstructs the ontology of finance as it is presented in Kenneth Arrow’s general equilibrium model of contingent commodities. The fundamental notion of modern finance, ‘Arrow securities’ (paying one monetary unit contingent upon a certain future event and nothing otherwise) is considered an elementary Luhmannian code of the economic. The performative, self-implementing tendencies in general equilibrium analysis are reinterpreted in view of the joint risk design as conceived by Dirk Baecker. Creating new (markets for) risks to control the future can be, on the one hand, traced back/justified with reference to Arrow’s world of contingent commodities and, on the other, rationalized as a way of adjusting the economic system and moving reality closer to its theoretical portrayal. I also associate the creation of the new ‘risk structures’ with the new overarching temporality inviting us to tame uncertainty and govern the future.

The Futurists. Experts in World Futures

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jenny Andersson
Keyword(s):  
Cold War ◽  
Status Quo ◽  
The Other ◽  
Futures Studies ◽  
The Future ◽  
The Status ◽  
The One ◽  
The Cold War ◽  
Images Of The Future ◽  
The Way

Alvin Toffler’s writings encapsulated many of the tensions of futurism: the way that futurology and futures studies oscillated between forms of utopianism and technocracy with global ambitions, and between new forms of activism, on the one hand, and emerging forms of consultancy and paid advice on the other. Paradoxically, in their desire to create new images of the future capable of providing exits from the status quo of the Cold War world, futurists reinvented the technologies of prediction that they had initially rejected, and put them at the basis of a new activity of futures advice. Consultancy was central to the field of futures studies from its inception. For futurists, consultancy was a form of militancy—a potentially world altering expertise that could bypass politics and also escaped the boring halls of academia.

Monotheism in Isaiah

2020 ◽  
pp. 218-248
Author(s):  
Matthias Albani
Keyword(s):  
Historical Context ◽  
The Other ◽  
Divine Power ◽  
Crisis Situation ◽  
Catalytic Function ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
The Future ◽  
The One ◽  
Religious Crisis

The monotheistic confession in Isa 40–48 is best understood against the historical context of Israel’s political and religious crisis situation in the final years of Neo-Babylonian rule. According to Deutero-Isaiah, Yhwh is unique and incomparable because he alone truly predicts the “future” (Isa 41:22–29)—currently the triumph of Cyrus—which will lead to Israel’s liberation from Babylonian captivity (Isa 45). This prediction is directed against the Babylonian deities’ claim to possess the power of destiny and the future, predominantly against Bel-Marduk, to whom both Nabonidus and his opponents appeal in their various political assertions regarding Cyrus. According to the Babylonian conviction, Bel-Marduk has the universal divine power, who, on the one hand, directs the course of the stars and thus determines the astral omens and, on the other hand, directs the course of history (cf. Cyrus Cylinder). As an antithesis, however, Deutero-Isaiah proclaims Yhwh as the sovereign divine creator and leader of the courses of the stars in heaven as well as the course of history on earth (Isa 45:12–13). Moreover, the conflict between Nabonidus and the Marduk priesthood over the question of the highest divine power (Sîn versus Marduk) may have had a kind of “catalytic” function in Deutero-Isaiah’s formulation of the monotheistic confession.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document