IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/osf/osfxxx/aq2bz.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Marginalism and Scope in the Early Methodenstreit

Author

Listed:
  • van 't Klooster, Jens
  • Assistant, JHET

Abstract

Recent interpretations of the early Methodenstreit (1871 – 1883) between Gustav Schmoller and Carl Menger no longer identify a substantial point of controversy. I reconstruct the debate to show that the pivotal topic was the scope of economics. Menger claims that his Principles of Economics more or less capture the full scope of the discipline, which Schmoller denies. I also discuss recent Menger scholarship, which follows Friedrich Hayek in situating Menger at the edges or even outside the marginalist mainstream. I argue that this interpretation wrongly denies Menger his pioneer status as, possibly the first, marginalist.

Suggested Citation

  • van 't Klooster, Jens & Assistant, JHET, 2020. "Marginalism and Scope in the Early Methodenstreit," OSF Preprints aq2bz, Center for Open Science.
    • Handle: RePEc:osf:osfxxx:aq2bz
    DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/aq2bz
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://osf.io/download/5f7344b368d85003918a91d6/
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.31219/osf.io/aq2bz?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Marek Louzek, 2011. "The Battle of Methods in Economics. The Classical Methodenstreit—Menger vs. Schmoller," American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 70(2), pages 439-463, April.
    2. Erich Streissler, 1972. "To What Extent Was the Austrian School Marginalist?," History of Political Economy, Duke University Press, vol. 4(2), pages 426-441, Fall.
    3. Wieser, Friedrich, 1890. "The Austrian School and the Theory of Value," History of Economic Thought Articles, McMaster University Archive for the History of Economic Thought, vol. 1.
    4. Mark Blaug, 1972. "Was There a Marginal Revolution?," History of Political Economy, Duke University Press, vol. 4(2), pages 269-280, Fall.
    5. Knapp, Georg Friedrich, 1924. "The State Theory of Money," History of Economic Thought Books, McMaster University Archive for the History of Economic Thought, number knapp1924.
    6. Helge Peukert, 2001. "The Schmoller Renaissance," History of Political Economy, Duke University Press, vol. 33(1), pages 71-116, Spring.
    7. Tribe,Keith, 2007. "Strategies of Economic Order," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521619431.
    8. Robert B. Ekelund Jr & Robert F. Hébert, 2002. "Retrospectives: The Origins of Neoclassical Microeconomics," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 16(3), pages 197-215, Summer.
    9. Dekker,Erwin, 2019. "The Viennese Students of Civilization," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107565661.
    10. Screpanti, Ernesto & Zamagni, Stefano, 2005. "An Outline of the History of Economic Thought," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, edition 2, number 9780199279142, Decembrie.
    11. Donald Winch, 1972. "Marginalism and the Boundaries of Economic Science," History of Political Economy, Duke University Press, vol. 4(2), pages 325-343, Fall.
    12. Yukihiro Ikeda, 2008. "Carl Menger's monetary theory: A revisionist view," The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(3), pages 455-473.
    13. Moore, Gregory, 2003. "John Neville Keynes's Solution to the English Methodenstreit," Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Cambridge University Press, vol. 25(1), pages 5-38, March.
    14. Alla Semenova, 2014. "Carl Menger's theory of money's origins: Responding to revisionism," The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(1), pages 107-141, February.
    15. Gilles Campagnolo, 2016. "Carl Menger," Post-Print hal-01477195, HAL.
    16. Grimmer-Solem, Erik, 2003. "The Rise of Historical Economics and Social Reform in Germany 1864-1894," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199260416.
    17. Keynes, John Neville, 1890. "The Scope and Method of Political Economy," History of Economic Thought Books, McMaster University Archive for the History of Economic Thought, edition 4, number keynes1890.
    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. Stavros, Drakopoulos, 2021. "The Relation of Neoclassical Economics to other Disciplines: The case of Physics and Psychology," MPRA Paper 106597, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Yefimov, Vladimir, 2009. "Comparative historical institutional analysis of German, English and American economics," MPRA Paper 48173, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. repec:mje:mjejnl:v:12:y:2017:i:2:p:25-70 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Gilles Campagnolo & Sandye Gloria & Heinz Kurz & Richard Sturn, 2022. "On the modernity of Carl Menger: criss-cross views. Roundtable conversation," The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 29(5), pages 967-992, September.
    5. Stavros A. Drakopoulos, 2024. "Value Judgements, Positivism and Utility Comparisons in Economics," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 189(3), pages 423-437, January.
    6. Vladimir Yefimov, 2017. "Comparative Historical Institutional Analysis of German, English and American Economics," Montenegrin Journal of Economics, Economic Laboratory for Transition Research (ELIT), vol. 13(2), pages 25-70.
    7. Vladiir Yefimov, 2015. "Two Diputes of Methods, Three Constructivisms, and Three Liberalisms. Part II," Economy of region, Centre for Economic Security, Institute of Economics of Ural Branch of Russian Academy of Sciences, vol. 1(2), pages 72-85.
    8. Yefimov, V. M., 2015. "Two Diputes of Methods, Three Constructivisms, and Three Liberalisms. Part II," R-Economy, Ural Federal University, Graduate School of Economics and Management, vol. 1(2), pages 226-238.
    9. Eduard Braun, 2015. "Carl Menger’s Contribution to Capital Theory," History of Economic Ideas, Fabrizio Serra Editore, Pisa - Roma, vol. 23(1), pages 77-100.
    10. Galeev, A., 2022. "Proto-marginalist approach in Russia: Yuli Zhukovsky's interpretation of Ricardo," Journal of the New Economic Association, New Economic Association, vol. 55(3), pages 177-191.
    11. Yefimov, Vladimir, 2013. "Philosophie et science économiques : leur contribution respective aux discours politiques [Economic philosophy and economic science: their respective contributions to political discourse]," MPRA Paper 54598, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. Mykola Bunyk & Leonid Krasnozhon, 2022. "Young Mr. Mises and younger historicists: origins of Mises’s liberalism," The Review of Austrian Economics, Springer;Society for the Development of Austrian Economics, vol. 35(2), pages 177-191, June.
    13. David A. Harper & Anthony M. Endres, 2023. "Menger’s precursors in the German subjective-value tradition and his advancements in the theory of wants and goods," The Review of Austrian Economics, Springer;Society for the Development of Austrian Economics, vol. 36(2), pages 217-245, June.
    14. Thomas M. Humphrey, 1999. "Mercantilists and classicals: insights from doctrinal history," Economic Quarterly, Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond, issue Spr, pages 55-82.
    15. Su, Huei-Chun & Colander, David, 2021. "The Economist As Scientist, Engineer, Or Plumber?," Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Cambridge University Press, vol. 43(2), pages 297-312, June.
    16. Ulaş Şener, 2016. "Die Neutralitätstheorie des Geldes: Ein kritischer Überblick," Potsdam Economic Papers 04, 2nd. ed., Universität Potsdam, Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaftliche Fakultät.
    17. Kavaliou, A., 2020. "On the evaluation of Menger's theoretical evolution, or a story on "four Mengers"," Journal of the New Economic Association, New Economic Association, vol. 45(1), pages 44-63.
    18. Angelos Vouldis & Panayotis Michaelides & John Milios, 2011. "Emil Lederer and the Schumpeter-Hilferding-Tugan-Baranowsky Nexus," Review of Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(3), pages 439-460.
    19. Pavlina R. Tcherneva, 2008. "The Return of Fiscal Policy: Can the New Developments in the New Economic Consensus Be Reconciled with the Post-Keynesian View?," Economics Working Paper Archive wp_539, Levy Economics Institute.
    20. Phil Armstrong, 2020. "Can Heterodox Economics Make a Difference?," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 19964.
    21. Charalambos Vlados & Fotios Katimertzopoulos, 2019. "The ¡°Mystery¡± of Innovation: Bridging the Economic and Business Thinking and the Stra.Tech.Man Approach," Business and Economic Research, Macrothink Institute, vol. 9(1), pages 236-262, March.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:osf:osfxxx:aq2bz. 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: OSF (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://osf.io/preprints/ .

    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.