The 20th century: Marshallian controversies and Walrasian normalization

The 20th century: Marshallian controversies and Walrasian normalization

 

         

(Methodos XVII)

 

           We will consider here the relationships between Mill and Cournot, on the one hand, and Marshall and Walras, on the other hand.  Marshall, especially with his textbook, appears clearly in the legacy of Mill, doing another great synthesis and focusing on markets and firms.  His synthesis appears to be more of a sort of normalization than the implementation of a new research agenda, even if he declared some pious votes about economics as being influenced by biology. He appears, nonetheless, has much more ambiguous if we compare him to Walras’ clear-cut brand of marginalism.  

Much has been written about Marshall and we will not repeat it here, especially when he focused on biology as the Mecca for economics (Hodgson 1993).  What must be stressed is his sympathy with the young German historical school and his interest in the historical specificity problem (Hodgson 2001).  Walras is usually presented as a follower of Cournot, or at least much influenced by him.  It is true for the Cournot of the study of markets but not for the probability theory and the inspiration from biological principles that characterized his later investigations.

 

 


Cite this article as: {Jacquinet, Marc}, The 20th century: Marshallian controversies and Walrasian normalization,"{Management Critique}," in {https://critiquema.hypotheses.org}, 12/12/2019, https://critiquema.hypotheses.org/325.

Marc Jacquinet

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1157-060X

Vous aimerez aussi...

Laisser un commentaire

Votre adresse de messagerie ne sera pas publiée. Les champs obligatoires sont indiqués avec *

Ce site utilise Akismet pour réduire les indésirables. En savoir plus sur comment les données de vos commentaires sont utilisées.

Rechercher dans OpenEdition Search

Vous allez être redirigé vers OpenEdition Search