Question: Nash was born on July 9, 1959, to a devout Christian family, in southwest Detroit, Michigan. Nash's father, Robert, died of a heart attack on April 4, 1968, aged 36, when Nash was eight years old. On December 27, 1994, Nash's mother, Wanda, died after a four-year struggle against breast cancer. He attended Aquinas High School, followed by the University of Tennessee, where he majored in psychology and minored in educational philosophy.

Nash debuted in Total Nonstop Action Wrestling alongside the returning Scott Hall on November 7, 2004 at the inaugural monthly TNA pay-per-view, Victory Road, with the duo helping NWA World Heavyweight Champion Jeff Jarrett retain his title in a ladder match with Jeff Hardy. In subsequent weeks, the trio identified themselves as the Kings of Wrestling and began feuding with Hardy and A.J. Styles. At Turning Point on December 5, the Kings of Wrestling were defeated by Hardy, Styles, and Randy Savage.  Hall left TNA in early 2005, and Nash and Jarrett separated after Nash made clear his desire to win the NWA World Heavyweight Championship. Nash received a title shot against Jarrett on February 13, 2005 at Against All Odds, but lost following interference from the debuting Outlaw. Following the defeat, Nash joined forces with Sean Waltman and began feuding with the newly formed Planet Jarrett. At Destination X on March 13, Nash lost to The Outlaw in a First Blood match following interference from Jarrett, who struck Nash with his title belt. The rivalry between Planet Jarrett and Nash and his allies culminated in a scheduled Lethal Lockdown match at Lockdown on April 24 pitting Nash, Waltman, and Diamond Dallas Page against Jarrett, The Outlaw, and "The Alpha Male" Monty Brown. Nash, however, was removed from the card and replaced with B.G. James after contracting a staph infection, which left him sidelined for much of 2005.  Nash returned to TNA on October 1 for the first episode of Impact! on Spike TV, attacking and powerbombing Jarrett. Nash went on to challenge Jarrett to a match for the NWA World Heavyweight Championship at Bound for Glory on October 23. In the weeks preceding the event, Nash and Jarrett had several heated confrontations, on one occasion brawling with one another and with guest referee Tito Ortiz. On October 22, one day before Bound for Glory, Nash was hospitalized with chest pains. At Bound for Glory, a battle royal was held to determine the number one contender; Rhino won and then defeated Jarrett for the NWA World Heavyweight Championship. Nash was later discharged from the hospital, having suffered a mild cardiac episode. He made a partial return to the ring in December 2005, wrestling several matches on a tour of South Africa.

Using a quote from the above article, answer the following question: Who else?
HHHHHH
Answer: Heavyweight Champion Jeff Jarrett


Question: Roberto Mangabeira Unger (; born 24 March 1947) is a philosopher and politician. He has developed his views and positions across many fields, including social, political, and economic theory. In legal theory, he is best known by his work in the 1970s and 80s while at Harvard Law School as part of the Critical Legal Studies movement, which is held to have helped disrupt the methodological consensus in American law schools. His political activity helped the transition to democracy in Brazil in the aftermath of the military regime, and culminated with his appointment as Brazil's Minister of Strategic Affairs in 2007 and again in 2015.

Unger's critique of economics begins with the identification of a key moment in economic history, when the analysis of production and exchange turned away from social theory and engaged in a quest for scientific objectivity. In Unger's analysis, classical economics focused on the causal relations among social activities, which were connected with the production and distribution of wealth. Classical economists asked questions about the true basis of value, activities that contributed to national wealth, systems of rights, or about the forms of government under which people grow rich. In the late-nineteenth century, in response to attacks from socialist ideas and debates about how society works, and as a means to escape the conundrums of value theory and to answer how values could become prices, marginalist economics arose. This movement in economics disengaged economics from prescriptive and normative commitments to withdraw the study of economies from debates about how society worked and what kind of society we wanted to live in. For Unger, this moment in the history of economics robbed it of any analytical or practical value.  Unger's critique of Marginalism begins with Walras' equilibrium theory, which attempted to achieve a certainty of economic analysis by putting aside normative controversies of social organization. Unger finds three weaknesses that crippled the theory: foremost, the theory claimed that equilibrium would be spontaneously generated in a market economy. In reality, a self-adjusting equilibrium fails to occur. Second, the theory puts forth a determinate image of the market. Historically, however, the market has been shown to be indeterminate with different market arrangements. Third, the polemical use of efficiency fails to account for the differences of distribution among individuals, classes, and generations.  The consequences of the marginalist movement were profound for the study of economics, Unger says. The most immediate problem is that under this generalizing tendency of economics, there is no means by which to incorporate empirical evidence and thus to re-imagine the world and develop new theories and new directions. In this way, the discipline is always self-referential and theoretical. Furthermore, the lack of a normative view of the world curtails the ability to propose anything more than a policy prescription, which by definition always assumes a given context. The discipline can only rationalize the world and support a status quo. Lastly, Unger finds that this turn in economics ended up universalizing debates in macroeconomics and leaving the discipline without any historical perspective. A consequence, for example, was that Keynes' solution to a particular historical crisis was turned into a general theory when it should only be understood as a response to a particular situation.

Using a quote from the above article, answer the following question: how did he identify this key moment
HHHHHH
Answer:
In Unger's analysis, classical economics focused on the causal relations among social activities, which were connected with the production and distribution of wealth.