Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Content and method: an epistemic perspective on some historical episodes

Contents:

Author Info

  • Brian Loasby

Abstract

The double contrast between allocation and process and between formal proof and empirically based reasoning is selectively applied to the history of economics. Hume's rejection of provable knowledge led to Smith's psychological explanation of science and thence to his theory of growth through the division of labour. Marshall's cautious theorizing and cognitively based evolutionary perspective stimulated contrasting responses from Sraffa and Young. Robinson matched method to content but Chamberlin did not, and Andrews's attempt to develop a process-based price theory met more resistance than Penrose's reinvention of growth theory. We currently observe conflicting methods of handling evolution and business strategy.

Download Info

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
File URL: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09672560110103397
Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Bibliographic Info

Article provided by Taylor & Francis Journals in its journal The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought.

Volume (Year): 9 (2002)
Issue (Month): 1 ()
Pages: 72-95

as in new window
Handle: RePEc:taf:eujhet:v:9:y:2002:i:1:p:72-95

Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.tandfonline.com/REJH20

Order Information:
Web: http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/REJH20

Related research

Keywords: Knowledge; Analytical Systems; Equilibrium; Process; Evolution;

References

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
as in new window
  1. Richardson, G B, 1972. "The Organisation of Industry," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 82(327), pages 883-96, September.
  2. Foss, Nicolai J, 1999. "Edith Penrose, Economics and Strategic Management," Contributions to Political Economy, Oxford University Press, vol. 18(0), pages 87-104.
  3. Cavalieri, Duccio, 2001. "On Some Controversial Aspects of Sraffa's Theoretical System in the Second Half of the 1920s," MPRA Paper 43737, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  4. Cosmides, Leda & Tooby, John, 1994. "Better than Rational: Evolutionary Psychology and the Invisible Hand," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 84(2), pages 327-32, May.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

Citations

Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
as in new window

Cited by:
  1. Menudo, Jose M., 2011. "Market Stability in Adam Smith: Competitive Process and Institutions," MPRA Paper 15361, University Library of Munich, Germany.

Lists

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:eujhet:v:9:y:2002:i:1:p:72-95. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Michael McNulty).

If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.