THE DEPENDENCE EFFECT

The Dependence Effect

Critique of J.K. Galbraith (1958) - 'The Dependence Effect'

Purpose of this paper is to critically assess “effect of dependence" of JK Galbraith. This criticism is articulated theoretical contributions of John Kenneth Galbraith to our understanding of energy and consumption - two common themes in his writings. Galbraith also argues that should be considered as the theorist of cultural economy, if full import of his work is to be understood. Cultural theory can meet all these purposes, as can other types of theorizing. Like other theories, cultural theories take many forms and serve many purposes, but always include cultural theory is the key component in creating, explaining, and based on social meaning. Therefore, unlike asocial, the historical hypothesis of neoclassical economics, economic theory explicitly commits cultural theorizing of society pre-existing, historically contingent, symbolic system and agents acting within system structure symbolic, build, integrate, maintain, stabilize and develop new meanings within that society.

Cultural theory is not simply study of formation of cultural behavior, social and economic development. It is social construction of meaning emerges from human behavior within the cultural symbol system.

Galbraith theorizing about power consumption and includes how people choose, but also what this behavior means for people in our culture and consequences of this behavior in cultural system of meaning. Similarly, his theory of power addresses how power is used and sense of its uses and its effects on system of meaning itself.

Galbraith's first foray into theory of consumption is in Affluent Society (1958). This book contains the rich analysis of U.S. economy of 1950's, however, confine my discussion mainly Galbraith consumer behavior theories. Galbraith stylistic analysis in this book seems to be casual empiricism and selected observations. Closer reading reveals three separate arguments. First part is Galbraith's critique of underlying logic of neoclassical economics. Second part ...