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
To download:
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the
proper application to
view it first. Information about this may be contained
in the File-Format links below. 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.
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.
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.:
Cited by: (explanations, 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.)