IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/cambje/v34y2010i3p547-568.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Defending Marshall's 'masterpiece': Ralph Souter's critique of Robbins' Essay

Author

Listed:
  • Anthony M. Endres
  • M. Donoghue

Abstract

We examine Ralph W. Souter's defence, in the 1930s, of Marshall's Principles against Robbins' attempt to recast economics as a 'purely formal science of implications'. Souter elaborated on Marshall's invocations progressively to increase the realism of economic science and contrasted this perspective on Marshall with Robbins' atomistic bias, neglect of historical time and irreversibilities, arbitrary restrictions on the scope of economic science and emphasis on logical and mathematical form over content. Souter demonstrates that Robbins takes a Walrasian-inspired perspective on Marshall's equilibrium concept whereas the 'authentically Marshallian' equilibrium notion generally incorporates potential for endogenous change. On this and other matters Souter has doctrinal priority in drawing attention to Marshall's incipient 'evolutionary economics'. Copyright The Author 2009. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Cambridge Political Economy Society. All rights reserved., Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Anthony M. Endres & M. Donoghue, 2010. "Defending Marshall's 'masterpiece': Ralph Souter's critique of Robbins' Essay," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 34(3), pages 547-568.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:cambje:v:34:y:2010:i:3:p:547-568
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/cje/bep015
    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.

    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:oup:cambje:v:34:y:2010:i:3:p:547-568. 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.

    We have no bibliographic 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/cje .

    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.