IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Has Economics Progressed? Rectilinear, Historicist, Universalist, and Evolutionary Historiographies


  • Elias L. Khalil


No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Elias L. Khalil, 1995. "Has Economics Progressed? Rectilinear, Historicist, Universalist, and Evolutionary Historiographies," History of Political Economy, Duke University Press, vol. 27(1), pages 43-87, Spring.
  • Handle: RePEc:hop:hopeec:v:27:y:1995:i:1:p:43-87

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    File Function: link to full text
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Rod O'Donnell, 1992. "The Unwritten Books and Papers of J. M. Keynes," History of Political Economy, Duke University Press, vol. 24(4), pages 767-817, Winter.
    2. Peter D. Groenewegen, 1988. "Alfred Marshall and the Establishment of the Cambridge Economic Tripos," History of Political Economy, Duke University Press, vol. 20(4), pages 627-667, Winter.
    3. Pollard, Sidney, 1994. "New Light on an Old Master: Review Article," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 104(422), pages 138-153, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


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

    Cited by:

    1. Altug Yalcintas, 2012. "Between a rock and a hard place: second thoughts on Laibman’s Deep History and the theory of punctuated equilibrium with regard to intellectual evolution," The Journal of Philosophical Economics, Bucharest Academy of Economic Studies, The Journal of Philosophical Economics, vol. 6(1), November.
    2. Khalil, Elias L., 2010. "The Bayesian fallacy: Distinguishing internal motivations and religious beliefs from other beliefs," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 75(2), pages 268-280, August.
    3. Elias Khalil, 1999. "Institutions, Naturalism and Evolution," Review of Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(1), pages 61-81.
    4. Khalil, Elias, 2008. "The Bayesian Fallacy: Distinguishing Four Kinds of Beliefs," MPRA Paper 8474, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 26 Apr 2008.
    5. Mark Blaug, 2001. "No History of Ideas, Please, We're Economists," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 15(1), pages 145-164, Winter.

    More about this item




    Access and download statistics


    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:hop:hopeec:v:27:y:1995:i:1:p:43-87. 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: (Center for the History of Political Economy Webmaster). General contact details of provider: .

    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.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.