IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ctl/louvir/2009008.html

Marshall and Walras : Incompatible Bedfellows ?

Author

Listed:
  • Michel DE VROEY

    (UNIVERSITE CATHOLIQUE DE LOUVAIN, Institut de Recherches Economiques et Sociales (IRES))

Abstract

The standard view about the relation between the Marshallian and the Walrasian approaches is that they are complementary to each other. My aim in this paper is to show that, on the contrary, they constitute alternative sub-research programs within the wider neoclassical paradigm. I make my point by contrasting the two approaches against the following benchmarks : the purpose of economic theory according to Marshall and Walras, their views as the role of mathematics, their ways of looking at the working of the economy as whole, the conception of equilibrium underpinning their theories and finally their trade organization assumptions

Suggested Citation

  • Michel DE VROEY, 2009. "Marshall and Walras : Incompatible Bedfellows ?," LIDAM Discussion Papers IRES 2009008, Université catholique de Louvain, Institut de Recherches Economiques et Sociales (IRES).
    • Handle: RePEc:ctl:louvir:2009008
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://sites.uclouvain.be/econ/DP/IRES/2009008.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. De Vroey Michel & Duarte Pedro Garcia, 2013. "In search of lost time: the neoclassical synthesis," The B.E. Journal of Macroeconomics, De Gruyter, vol. 13(1), pages 965-995, January.
    2. Michel De Vroey, 2012. "Microfoundations: A Decisive Dividing Line between Keynesian and New Classical Macroeconomics?," Chapters, in: Microfoundations Reconsidered, chapter 5, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    3. De Vroey, Michel, 2011. "Lucas on the relationship between theory and ideology," Economics - The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal (2007-2020), Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel), vol. 5, pages 1-39.
    4. Pierrick Clerc & Michel De Vroey, 2020. "Brunner Versus Friedman: Diverging Aspirations For The Monetarist Project," LIDAM Discussion Papers IRES 2020027, Université catholique de Louvain, Institut de Recherches Economiques et Sociales (IRES).
    5. Richard Arena & Katia Caldari, 2019. "Léon Walras and Alfred Marshall: Microeconomic Rational Choice or Human and Social Nature?," GREDEG Working Papers 2019-33, Groupe de REcherche en Droit, Economie, Gestion (GREDEG CNRS), Université Côte d'Azur, France.
    6. Michel De Vroey, 2014. "Backhouse and Boianovsky on "disequilibrium theory". A review article of transforming modern macroeconomics. Exploring disequilibrium microfoundations, 1956-2003," The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(4), pages 724-742, August.
    7. Michel de Vroey, 2018. "The History of Recent Macroeconomics Through the Lens of the Marshall-Walras Divide," LIDAM Discussion Papers IRES 2018018, Université catholique de Louvain, Institut de Recherches Economiques et Sociales (IRES).
    8. Richard Arena & Katia Caldari, 2019. "Léon Walras and Alfred Marshall : microeconomic rational choice or human and social nature?," Working Papers halshs-02400844, HAL.
    9. Poitras, Geoffrey, 2018. "The pre-history of econophysics and the history of economics: Boltzmann versus the marginalists," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 507(C), pages 89-98.
    10. Marek Hudik, 2019. "Two interpretations of the rational choice theory and the relevance of behavioral critique," Rationality and Society, , vol. 31(4), pages 464-489, November.
    11. Michel De Vroey, 2010. "Getting rid of Keynes ? A survey of the history of macroeconomics from Keynes to Lucas and beyond," Working Paper Research 187, National Bank of Belgium.

    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:ctl:louvir:2009008. 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: Virginie LEBLANC (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iruclbe.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.