Corridors, Coordination, and the Entrepreneurial Theory of the Market Process

We respond to points made by Klein and Briggeman (2010), who criticize the use of definitive statements within the body of research by Israel Kirzner. We contend that Klein and Briggeman's critique fails to recognize the context of Kirzner's arguments within the broader tradition of neoclassical economics. We describe this context and explain its relevance to Kirzner's conclusions. In contrast to Klein and Briggeman, we see Kirzner as an embodiment of the tradition of political economy begun by Adam Smith. Properly understood, this tradition remains a positive social science. Klein and Briggeman's concerns regarding definitive statements are well intentioned but misplaced. Political economists should be wary of prediction with precision, but there are scientific truths of economic law – general tendencies and pattern prediction. Kirzner successfully threads these lines