Eleven theses on political economy and ‘rethinking economics’: The role of the history of economic thought in the ‘Italian tradition’

Author(s):  
Riccardo Bellofiore
2019 ◽  
pp. 135-145
Author(s):  
Viktor A. Popov

Deep comprehension of the advanced economic theory, the talent of lecturer enforced by the outstanding working ability forwarded Vladimir Geleznoff scarcely at the end of his thirties to prepare the publication of “The essays of the political economy” (1898). The subsequent publishing success (8 editions in Russia, the 1918­-year edition in Germany) sufficiently demonstrates that Geleznoff well succeded in meeting the intellectual inquiry of the cross­road epoch of the Russian history and by that taking the worthful place in the history of economic thought in Russia. Being an acknowledged historian of science V. Geleznoff was the first and up to now one of the few to demonstrate the worldwide community of economists the theoretically saturated view of Russian economic thought in its most fruitful period (end of XIX — first quarter of XX century).


1946 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 121-152 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dudley Dillard

Although we still live in the shadow of the years between the First and the Second World Wars, already it seems quite clear that future historians of economic thought will regard John Maynard Keynes as the outstanding economist of this turbulent period. As one writer has recently said, “The rapid and widespread adoption of the Keynesian theory by contemporary economists, particularly by those who at first were highly critical, will probably be recorded in the future history of economic thought as an extraordinary happening.” Book after book by leading economists acknowledges a heavy debt to the stimulating thought of Lord Keynes. The younger generation of economists, especially those whose thinking matured during the great depression of the thirties, have been particularly influenced by him.


2012 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 81-96 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ben Fine ◽  
Dimitris Milonakis

AbstractIn this response to the symposium on our two books we try to deal as fully as possible in the brief space available with most of the major issues raised by our distinguished commentators. Although at least three of them are in agreement with the main thrust of the arguments put forward in our books, they all raise important issues relating to methodology, the history of economic thought (including omissions), and a number of more specific issues. Our answer is based on the restatement of the chief purpose of our two books, describing the intellectual history of the evolution of economic science emphasising the role of the excision of the social and the historical from economic theorising in the transition from (classical) political economy to (neoclassical) economics, only for the two to be reunited through the vulgar form of economics imperialism following the monolithic dominance of neoclassical economics at the expense of pluralism after the Second World War. The importance of political economy for the future of economic science is vigorously argued for.


2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kenneth John Button

This paper is concerned with examining the role of the English economist Arthur (A.J.) Brown in the 1950s debate surrounding the wage-change unemployment relationship. While the publication of William (Bill) Phillips’ 1958 paper, and the subsequent moniker of the “Phillips Curve” attracted a wealth of attention, Brown’s book on the subject, The Great Inflation, and his later work on inflation, has received much less. Here the focus is on redressing somewhat this situation by looking at Brown’s work to see how much it predates Phillips’ paper, and what differences there are to it. We also considers this within the changing institutional structure of English economic networks in the 1950s that led to a relatively rapid acceptance of Phillips’ analysis, and in many cases, to a strong, ordinal interpretation of the Phillips Curve that overshadowed Brown’s work.


2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mauro Boianovsky

The role of traveling as a source of discovery and development of new ideas has been controversial in the history of economics. Despite their protective attitude toward established theory, economists have traveled widely and gained new insights or asked new questions as a result of their exposition to “other” economic systems, ideas and forms of behavior. That is particularly the case when they travel to new places while their frameworks are in their initial stages or undergoing changes. This essay examines economists’ traveling as a potential source of new hypotheses, from the 18th to the 20th centuries, with a detailed case study of Douglass North’s 1961 travel to Brazil.


2014 ◽  
Vol 52 (4) ◽  
pp. 1162-1165

Catherine Herfeld of the Munich Center for Mathematical Philosophy reviews “Defending the History of Economic Thought”, by Steven Kates. The Econlit abstract of this book begins: “Explores the importance of the study of the history of economic thought to the practice of economics. Discusses why to study the history of economic thought; debating the role of the history of economic thought; teaching the history of economic thought; and defending the history of economic thought. Kates is with the School of Economics, Finance, and Marketing at RMIT University.”


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document