IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/adl/wpaper/2005-08.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Knight versus Herskovits: A Methodologically Charged Debate in the 1940s

Author

Listed:
  • Eran Binenbaum

    (School of Economics, University of Adelaide)

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Eran Binenbaum, 2005. "Knight versus Herskovits: A Methodologically Charged Debate in the 1940s," School of Economics and Public Policy Working Papers 2005-08, University of Adelaide, School of Economics and Public Policy.
    • Handle: RePEc:adl:wpaper:2005-08
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://media.adelaide.edu.au/economics/papers/doc/wp2005-08.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Boland, Lawrence A, 1981. "On the Futility of Criticizing the Neoclassical Maximization Hypothesis," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 71(5), pages 1031-1036, December.
    2. David Hamilton, 1991. "The Meaning of Anthropology for Economic Science: A Case for Intellectual Reciprocity," Journal of Economic Issues, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(4), pages 937-949, December.
    3. Frank H. Knight, 1941. "Anthropology and Economics," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 49(2), pages 247-247.
    4. Melville J. Herskovits, 1941. "Economics and Anthropology: A Rejoinder," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 49(2), pages 269-269.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Dimand, Robert W. & Saffu, Kojo, 2021. "Polly Hill: Crossing And Contesting The Boundaries Of Anthropology, Economics, African Studies, And Entrepreneurship Studies," Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Cambridge University Press, vol. 43(2), pages 279-296, June.
    2. Jérôme Ballet, 2018. "Anthropology and Economics: The Argument for a Microeconomic Anthropology," Cahiers du GREThA (2007-2019) 2018-14, Groupe de Recherche en Economie Théorique et Appliquée (GREThA).
    3. Pelikan, Pavel, 2006. "Markets vs. Government when Rationality Is Unequally Bounded: Some Consequences of Cognitive Inequalities for Theory and Policy," Ratio Working Papers 85, The Ratio Institute, revised 03 Sep 2006.
    4. Pelikan, Pavel, 1997. "Allocation of Economic Competence in Teams: A Comparative Institutional Analysis," Working Paper Series 480, Research Institute of Industrial Economics.
    5. Schnellenbach, Jan & Schubert, Christian, 2015. "Behavioral political economy: A survey," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 40(PB), pages 395-417.
    6. Clark, Stephen A., 1995. "Indecisive choice theory," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 155-170, October.
    7. Ole Røgeberg & Morten Nordberg, 2005. "A defence of absurd theories in economics," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(4), pages 543-562.
    8. Gerald T. Healy III & Jing Ru Tan & Peter F. Orazem, 2020. "Measuring Market Power in Professional Baseball, Basketball, Football, and Hockey," The American Economist, Sage Publications, vol. 65(2), pages 214-231, October.
    9. Amitava Krishna Dutt & Peter Skott, 2006. "Keynesian Theory and the AD-AS Framework: A Reconsideration," Contributions to Economic Analysis, in: Quantitative and Empirical Analysis of Nonlinear Dynamic Macromodels, pages 149-172, Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
    10. Pierre Bentata, 2009. "Replacing Neo-Classical Maximization in the Realm of Human Action," CAE Working Papers 63, Aix-Marseille Université, CERGAM.
    11. Pavel Pelikán, 2010. "The Government Economic Agenda in a Society of Unequally Rational Individuals," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 63(2), pages 231-255, May.
    12. Cheng LI, 2020. "The rationality principle as a universal grammar of economic explanations," The Journal of Philosophical Economics, Bucharest Academy of Economic Studies, The Journal of Philosophical Economics, vol. 13(2), pages 58-80, November.
    13. Carl Emmerson & Howard Reed & Andrew Shephard, 2004. "An assessment of PenSim2," IFS Working Papers W04/21, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    14. Olivier Mesly & David W. Shanafelt & Nicolas Huck, 2021. "Dysfunctional Markets: A Spray of Prey Perspective," Journal of Economic Issues, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 55(3), pages 797-819, July.
    15. Pelikan, Pavel, 2006. "Markets vs. Government when Rationality is Unequally Bounded: Some Consequences of Cognitive Inequalities for Theory and Policy," Freiburg Discussion Papers on Constitutional Economics 06/5, Walter Eucken Institut e.V..
    16. Pessali, Huascar & Berger, Bruno, 2010. "A teoria da perspectiva e as mudanças de preferência no mainstream: um prospecto lakatoseano [Prospect theory and preference change in the mainstream of economics: a Lakatosian prospect]," MPRA Paper 26104, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. D. Wade Hands, 1990. "Thirteen theses on progress in economic methodology," Finnish Economic Papers, Finnish Economic Association, vol. 3(1), pages 72-76, Spring.
    18. Senderski, Marcin, 2014. "Ecumenical foundations? On the coexistence of Austrian and neoclassical views on utility," MPRA Paper 67024, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    19. Henrik Egbert & Teodor Sedlarski & Aleksandar B. Todorov, 2021. "Foundations of contemporary economics: Frank H. Knight on uncertainty, capital theory, and the beginnings of the Chicago school," Economic Thought journal, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences - Economic Research Institute, issue 6, pages 74-90.
    20. Swee Hoon Chuah, 2003. "Anthropology and Economic Imperialism: The Battlefield of Culture," Occasional Papers 3, Nottingham University Business School.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:adl:wpaper:2005-08. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Qazi Haque (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/decadau.html .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.