English historical school of economics
Template:EngvarB The English historical school of economics sought a return of inductive methods in economics, following the triumph of the deductive approach of David Ricardo in the early 19th century.[1] The school considered itself the intellectual heirs of past figures who had emphasised empiricism and induction, such as Francis BaconScript error: No such module "Unsubst". and Adam Smith.[2][3] Included in this school are William Whewell, Richard Jones, Thomas Edward Cliffe Leslie, Walter Bagehot, Thorold Rogers, Arnold Toynbee, William Cunningham, and William Ashley.[1]
Concepts
The economists of the English historical school were in general agreement on several ideas. They pursued an inductive approach to economics rather than the deductive approach taken by classical and neoclassical theorists. They recognised the need for careful statistical research. They rejected the hypothesis of "the profit maximizing individual" or the "calculus of pleasure and pain" as the only basis for economic analysis and policy. They believed that it was more reasonable to base analysis on the collective whole of altruistic individuals.[4] Historical economists of the nineteenth century also rejected the view that economic policy prescriptions, however derived, would apply universally, without regard to place or time, as followers of the Ricardian and Marshallian schools did.
Alfred Marshall acknowledged the force of the historical school's views in his 1890 synthesis:
Influences
John Stuart Mill, Auguste Comte, and Herbert Spencer appear among the influences on the English historical economists. The second half of Queen Victoria's reign saw the triumph of evolutionary concepts in the sciences (geology, biology, and sociology) and a transition from a "coal and iron" based manufacturing[5] economy to one based on communication, urbanisation, finance, and empire. The rise of the historical school of jurisprudence provided "allies in the struggle against the dominance of the abstract theory."[6] Historical economists viewed classical and neoclassical economics as too formal and as a rationalisation of free-trade policies[1] in a colonial and imperial setting.
See also
References
<templatestyles src="Reflist/styles.css" />
Script error: No such module "Check for unknown parameters".
Further reading
- Ashley, William J. 1897. "The Tory Origin of Free Trade Policy," Quarterly Journal of Economics, July 1897. McMaster, on line.
- Ashton, T. S. 1948. The Industrial Revolution. Oxford, Oxford University Press.
- Cliffe Leslie, T. E. 1870. "The Political Economy of Adam Smith." Fortnightly Review (London). 14:549–63. On line.
- Goldman, Lawrence. 1989. "Entrepreneurs in Business History", The Business History Review, Vol. 63, No. 1, (Spring, 1989), pp. 223–25.
- Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- Geoffrey Martin Hodgson, "Alfred Marshall and the British Methodendiskurs", How Economics Forgot History: The Problem of Historical Specificity in the Social Sciences, pp. 95–112. Routledge (2001) Template:ISBN
- Spiegel, Henry William (1991). The Growth of Economic Thought. Durham & London: Duke University Press. Template:ISBN
- Rogers, Thorold. 1880. "Editor's Preface" to Adam Smith, An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations, 2 vols. (1869); revised edition (1880), pp. xxxiv et seq; on line at Osmania University, Digital Library of India, Internet Archive.
External links
Script error: No such module "Navbox". Script error: No such module "Navbox".