Category: History of Economics

Categories
Cambridge Chicago Columbia Economists Germany Harvard History of Economics Johns Hopkins LSE Oxford Teaching Undergraduate Wisconsin Yale

Survey of Economics Education. Colleges and Universities (Seligman), Schools (Sullivan), 1911

 

In V. Orval Watt’s papers at the Hoover Institution archives (Box 8) one finds notes from his Harvard graduate economics courses (early 1920s). There I found the bibliographic reference to the article transcribed below. The first two parts of this encyclopedia entry were written by Columbia’s E.R.A. Seligman who briefly sketched the history of economics and then presented a survey of the development of economics education at  colleges and universities in Europe and the United States. Appended to Seligman’s contribution was a much shorter discussion of economics education in the high schools of the United States by the high-school principal,  James Sullivan, Ph.D.

_________________________

 

ECONOMICS
— History —

Edwin R. A. Seligman, Ph.D., LL.D.
Professor of Political Economy, Columbia University

The science now known as Economics was for a long time called Political Economy. This term is due to a Frenchman — Montchrétien, Sieur de Watteville — who wrote in 1615 a book with that title, employing a term which had been used in a slightly different sense by Aristotle. During the Middle Ages economic questions were regarded very largely from the moral and theological point of view, so that the discussions of the day were directed rather to a consideration of what ought to be, than of what is.

The revolution of prices in the sixteenth century and the growth of capital led to great economic changes, which brought into the foreground, as of fundamental importance, questions of commerce and industry. Above all, the breakdown of the feudal system and the formation of national states emphasized the considerations of national wealth and laid stress on the possibility of governmental action in furthering national interests. This led to a discussion of economic problems on a somewhat broader scale, — a discussion now carried on, not by theologians and canonists, but by practical business men and by philosophers interested in the newer political and social questions. The emphasis laid upon the action of the State also explains the name Political Economy. Most of the discussions, however, turned on the analysis of particular problems, and what was slowly built up was a body of practical precepts rather than of theoretic principles, although, of course, both the rules of action and the legislation which embodied them rested at bottom on theories which were not yet adequately formulated.

The origin of the modern science of economics, which may be traced back to the third quarter of the eighteenth century, is due to three fundamental causes. In the first place, the development of capitalistic enterprise and the differentiation between the laborer and the capitalist brought into prominence the various shares in distribution, notably the wages of the laborer, the profits of the capitalist, and the rent of the landowner. The attempt to analyze the meaning of these different shares and their relation to national wealth was the chief concern of the body of thinkers in France known as Physiocrats, who also called themselves Philosophes-Économistes, or simply Économistes, of whom the court physician of Louis XVI, Quesnay, was the head, and who published their books in 1757-1780.

The second step in the evolution of economic science was taken by Adam Smith (q.v.). In the chair of philosophy at the University of Glasgow, to which Adam Smith was appointed in 1754, and in which he succeeded Hutcheson, it was customary to lecture on natural law in some of its applications to politics. Gradually, with the emergence of the more important economic problems, the same attempt to find an underlying natural explanation for existing phenomena was extended to the sphere of industry and trade; and during the early sixties Adam Smith discussed these problems before his classes under the head of “police.” Finally, after a sojourn in France and an acquaintance with the French ideas, Adam Smith developed his general doctrines in his immortal work. The Wealth of Nations, published in 1776. When the industrial revolution, which was just beginning as Adam Smith wrote, had made its influence felt in the early decades of the nineteenth century, Ricardo attempted to give the first thorough analysis of our modern factory system of industrial life, and this completed the framework of the structure of economic science which is now being gradually filled out.

The third element in the formation of modern economics was the need of elaborating an administrative system in managing the government property of the smaller German and Italian rulers, toward the end of the eighteenth century. This was the period of the so-called police state when the government conducted many enterprises which are now left in private hands. In some of the German principalities, for instance, the management of the government lands, mines, industries, etc., was assigned to groups of officials known as chambers. In their endeavor to elaborate proper methods of administration these chamber officials and their advisors gradually worked out a system of principles to explain the administrative rules. The books written, as well as the teaching chairs founded, to expound these principles came under the designation of the Chamber sciences (Camiralia or Cameral-Wissenschaften) — a term still employed to-day at the University of Heidelberg. As Adam Smith’s work became known in Germany and Italy by translations, the chamber sciences gradually merged into the science of political economy.

Finally, with the development of the last few decades, which has relegated to the background the administrative and political side of the discipline, and has brought forward the purely scientific character of the subject, the term Political Economy has gradually given way to Economics.

Development of Economic Teaching

Edwin R. A. Seligman, Ph.D., LL.D.
Professor of Political Economy, Columbia University

— Europe —

As has been intimated in the preceding section, the first attempts to teach what we to-day would call economics were found in the European universities which taught natural law, and in some of the Continental countries where the chamber sciences were pursued. The first independent chairs of political economy were those of Naples in 1753, of which the first incumbent was (Genovesi, and the professorship of cameral science at Vienna in 1763, of which the first incumbent was Sonnenfels. It was not, however, until the nineteenth century that political economy was generally introduced as a university discipline. When the new University of Berlin was created in 1810, provision was made for teaching in economics, and this gradually spread to the other German universities. In France a chair of economics was established in 1830 in the Collège de France, and later on in some of the technical schools; but economics did not become a part of the regular university curriculum until the close of the seventies, when chairs of political economy were created in the faculties of law, and not, as was customary in the other Continental countries, in the faculties of philosophy. In England the first professorship of political economy was that instituted in 1805 at Haileybury College, which trained the students for the East India service. The first incumbent of this chair was Malthus. At University College, London, a chair of economics was established in 1828, with McCulloch as the first incumbent; and at Dublin a chair was founded in Trinity College in 1832 by Archbishop Whately; at Oxford a professorship was established in 1825, with Nassau W. Senior as the first incumbent. His successors were Richard Whately (1830), W. F. Lloyd (1836), H. Merivale (1838), Travers Twiss (1842), Senior (1847), G. K. Richards (1852), Charles Neate (1857), Thorold Rogers (1862), Bonamy Price (1868), Thorold Rogers (1888). and F. Y. Edgeworth (1891). At Cambridge the professorship dates from 1863, the first incumbent being Henry Fawcett, who was followed by Alfred Marshall in 1884 and by A. C. Pigou in 1908. In all these places, however, comparatively little attention was paid at first to the teaching of economics, and it was not until the close of the nineteenth century and the beginning of the twentieth that any marked progress was made, although the professorship at King’s College, London, dates back to 1859, and that at the University of Edinburgh to 1871. Toward the close of the nineteenth century, chairs in economics were created in the provincial universities, especially at Birmingham, Manchester, Liverpool, Sheffield, Bristol, Durham, and the like, as well as in Scotland and Wales; and a great impetus to the teaching of economics was given by the foundation, in 1895, of the London School of Economics, which has recently been made a part of the University of London.

— United States —

Economics was taught at first in the United States, as in England, by incumbents of the chair of philosophy; but no especial attention was paid to the study, and no differentiation of the subject matter was made. The first professorship in the title of which the subject is distinctively mentioned was that instituted at Columbia College, New York, where John McVickar, who had previously lectured on the subject under the head of philosophy, was made professor of moral philosophy and political economy in 1819. In order to commemorate this fact, Columbia University established some years ago the McVickar professorship of political economy. The second professorship in the United States was instituted at South Carolina College, Columbia, S. C, where Thomas Cooper, professor of chemistry, had the subject of political economy added to the title of his chair in 1826. A professorship of similar sectional influence was that in political economy, history, and metaphysics filled in the College of William and Mary in 1827, by Thomas Roderick Dew (1802-1846). The separate professorships of political economy, however, did not come until after the Civil War. Harvard established a professorship of political economy in 1871; Yale in 1872; and Johns Hopkins in 1876.

The real development of economic teaching on a large scale began at the close of the seventies and during the early eighties. The newer problems bequeathed to the country by the Civil War were primarily economic in character. The rapid growth of industrial capitalism brought to the front a multitude of questions, whereas before the war well-nigh the only economic problems had been those of free trade and of banking, which were treated primarily from the point of view of partisan politics. The newer problems that confronted the country led to the exodus of a number of young men to Germany, and with their return at the end of the seventies and beginning of the eighties, chairs were rapidly multiplied in all the larger universities. Among these younger men were Patten and James, who went to the University of Pennsylvania; Clark, of Amherst and later of Columbia; Farnam and Hadley of Yale; Taussig of Harvard; H. C. Adams of Michigan; Mayo-Smith and Seligman of Columbia; and Ely of Johns Hopkins. The teaching of economics on a university basis at Johns Hopkins under General Francis A. Walker helped to create a group of younger scholars who soon filled the chairs of economics throughout the country. In 1879 the School of Political Science at Columbia was inaugurated on a university basis, and did its share in training the future teachers of the country. Gradually the teaching force was increased in all the larger universities, and chairs were started in the colleges throughout the length and breadth of the land.

At the present time, most of the several hundred colleges in the United States offer instruction in the subject, and each of the larger institutions has a staff of instructors devoted to it. At institutions like Columbia, Harvard, Yale, Chicago, and Wisconsin there are from six to ten professors of economics and social science, together with a corps of lecturers, instructors, and tutors.

Teaching of Economics in the American Universities. — The present-day problems of the teaching of economics in higher institutions of learning are seriously affected by the transition stage through which these institutions are passing. In the old American college, when economics was introduced it was taught as a part of the curriculum designed to instill general culture. As the graduate courses were added, the more distinctly professional and technical phases of the subject were naturally emphasized. As a consequence, both the content of the course and the method employed tended to differentiate. But the unequal development of our various institutions has brought great unclearness into the whole pedagogical problem. Even the nomenclature is uncertain. In one sense graduate courses may be opposed to undergraduate courses; and if the undergraduate courses are called the college courses, then the graduate courses should be called the university courses. The term “university,” however, is coming more and more, in America at least, to be applied to the entire complex of the institutional activities, and the college proper or undergraduate department is considered a part of the university. Furthermore, if by university courses as opposed to college courses we mean advanced, professional, or technical courses, a difficulty arises from the fact that the latter year or years of the college course are tending to become advanced or professional in character. Some institutions have introduced the combined course, that is, a combination of so-called college and professional courses; other institutions permit students to secure their baccalaureate degree at the end of three or even two and a half years. In both cases, the last year of the college will then cover advanced work, although in the one case it may be called undergraduate, and in the other graduate, work.

The confusion consequent upon this unequal development has had a deleterious influence on the teaching of economics, as it has in many other subjects. In all our institutions we find a preliminary or beginners’ course in economics, and in our largest institutions we find some courses reserved expressly for advanced or graduate students. In between these, however, there is a broad field, which, in some institutions, is cultivated primarily from the point of view of graduates, in others from the point of view of undergraduates, and in most cases is declared to be open to both graduates and undergraduates. This is manifestly unfortunate. For, if the courses, are treated according to advanced or graduate methods, they do not fulfill their proper function as college studies. On the other hand, if they are treated as undergraduate courses, they are more or less unsuitable for advanced or graduate students. In almost all of the American institutions the same professors conduct both kinds of courses. In only one institution, namely, at Columbia University, is the distinction between graduate and undergraduate courses in economics at all clearly drawn, although even there not with precision. At Columbia University, of the ten professors who are conducting courses in economics and social science, one half have seats only in the graduate faculties, and do no work at all in the college or undergraduate department; but even there, these professors give a few courses, which, while frequented to an overwhelming extent by graduate students, are open to such undergraduates as may be declared to be advanced students.

It is necessary, therefore, to distinguish, in principle at least, between the undergraduate or college courses properly so-called, and the university or graduate courses. For it is everywhere conceded that at the extremes, at least, different pedagogical methods are appropriate.

The College or Undergraduate Instruction. — Almost everywhere in the American colleges there is a general or preliminary or foundation course in economics. This ordinarily occupies three hours a week for the entire year, or five hours a week for the semester, or half year, although the three-hour course in the fundamental principles occasionally continues only for a semester. The foundation of such a course is everywhere textbook work, with oral discussion, or quizzes, and frequent tests. Where the number of students is small, this method can be effectively employed; but where, as in our larger institutions, the students attending this preliminary course are numbered by the hundreds, the difficulties multiply. Various methods are employed to solve these difficulties. In some cases the class attends as a whole at a lecture which is given once a week by the professor, while at the other two weekly sessions the class is divided into small sections of from twenty to thirty, each of them in charge of an instructor who carries on the drill work. In a few instances, these sections are conducted in part by the same professor who gives the lecture, in part by other professors of equal grade. In other cases where this forms too great a drain upon the strength of the faculty, the sections are put in the hands of younger instructors or drill masters. In other cases, again, the whole class meets for lecture purposes twice a week, and the sections meet for quiz work only once a week. Finally, the instruction is sometime carried on entirely by lectures to the whole class, supplemented by numerous written tests.

While it cannot be said that any fixed method has yet been determined, there is a growing consensus of opinion that the best results can be reached by the combination of one general lecture and two quiz hours in sections. The object of the general lecture is to present a point of view from which the problems may be taken up, and to awaken a general interest in the subject among the students. The object of the section work is to drill the students thoroughly in the principles of the science; and for this purpose it is important in a subject like economics to put the sections as far as possible in the hands of skilled instructors rather than of recent graduates.

Where additional courses are offered to the Undergraduates, they deal with special subjects in the domain of economic history, statistics, and practical economics. In many such courses good textbooks are now available, and especially in the last class of subject is an attempt is being made here and there to introduce the case system as utilized in the law schools. This method is, however, attended by some difficulties, arising from the fact that the materials used so quickly become antiquated and do not have the compelling force of precedent, as is the case in law. In the ordinary college course, therefore, chief reliance must still be put upon the independent work and the fresh illustrations that are brought to the classroom by the instructor.

In some American colleges the mistake has been made of introducing into the college curriculum methods that are suitable only to the university. Prominent among these are the exclusive use of the lecture system, and the employment of the so-called seminar. This, however, only tends to confusion. On the other hand, in some of the larger colleges the classroom work is advantageously supplemented by discussions and debates in the economics club, and by practical exercises in dealing with the current economic problems as they are presented in the daily press.

In most institutions the study of economics is not begun until the sophomore or the junior year, it being deemed desirable to have a certain maturity of judgment and a certain preparation in history and logic. In some instances, however, the study of economics is undertaken at the very beginning of the college course, with the resulting difficulty of inadequately distinguishing between graduate and undergraduate work.

Another pedagogical question which has given rise to some difficulty is the sequence of courses. Since the historical method in economics became prominent, it is everywhere recognized that some training in the historical development of economic institutions is necessary to a comprehension of existing facts. We can know what is very much better by grasping what has been and how it has come to be. The point of difference, however, is as to whether the elementary course in the principles should come first and be supplemented by a course in economic history, or whether, on the contrary, the course in economic history should precede that in the principles. Some institutions follow one method, others the second; and there are good arguments on both sides. It is the belief of the writer, founded on a long experience, that on the whole the best results can be reached by giving as introductory to the study of economic principles a short survey of the leading points of economic history. In a few of the modem textbooks this plan is intentionally followed. Taking it all in all, it may be said that college instruction in economics is now not only exceedingly widespread in the United States, but continually improving in character and methods.

University or Graduate Instruction. — The university courses in economics are designed primarily for those who either wish to prepare themselves for the teaching of economics or who desire such technical training in methods or such an intimate acquaintance with the more developed matter as is usually required by advanced or professional students in any discipline. The university courses in the larger American institutions which now take up every important subject in the discipline, and which are conducted by a corps of professors, comprise three elements: first, the lectures of the professor; second, the seminar or periodical meeting between the professor and a group of advanced students; third, the economics club, or meeting of the students without the professor.

(1) The Lectures: In the university lectures the method is different from that in the college courses. The object is not to discipline the student, but to give him an opportunity of coming into contact with the leaders of thought and with the latest results of scientific advance on the subject. Thus no roll of attendance is called, and no quizzes are enforced and no periodical tests of scholarship are expected. In the case of candidates for the Ph.D. degree, for instance, there is usually no examination until the final oral examination, when the student is expected to display a proper acquaintance with the whole subject. The lectures, moreover, do not attempt to present the subject in a dogmatic way, as is more or less necessary in the college courses, but, on the contrary, are designed to present primarily the unsettled problems and to stimulate the students to independent thinking. The university lecture, in short, is expected to give to the student what cannot be found in the books on the subject.

(2) The Seminar: Even with the best of will, however, the necessary limitations prevent the lecturer from going into the minute details of the subject. In order to provide opportunity for this, as well as for a systematic training of the advanced students in the method of attacking this problem, periodical meetings between the professor and the students have now become customary under the name of the seminar, introduced from Germany. In most of our advanced universities the seminar is restricted to those students who are candidates for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, although in some cases a preliminary seminar is arranged for graduate students who are candidates for the degree of Master of Arts. Almost everywhere a reading knowledge of French and German is required. In the United States, as on the European continent generally, there are minor variations in the conduct of the seminar. Some professors restrict the attendance to a small group of most advanced students, of from fifteen to twenty-five; others virtually take in all those who apply. Manifestly the personal contact and the “give and take,” which are so important a feature of the seminar, become more difficult as the numbers increase. Again, in some institutions each professor has a seminar of his own; but this is possible only where the number of graduate students is large. In other cases the seminar consists of the students meeting with a whole group of professors. While this has a certain advantage of its own, it labors under the serious difficulty that the individual professor is not able to impress his own ideas and his own personality so effectively on the students; and in our modern universities students are coming more and more to attend the institution for the sake of some one man with whom they wish to study. Finally, the method of conducting the seminar differs in that in some cases only one general subject is assigned to the members for the whole term, each session being taken up by discussion of a different phase of the general subject. In other cases a new subject is taken up at every meeting of the seminar. The advantage of the latter method is to permit a greater range of topics, and to enable each student to report on the topic in which he is especially interested, and which, perhaps, he may be taking up for his doctor’s dissertation. The advantage of the former method is that it enables the seminar to enter into the more minute details of the general subject, and thus to emphasize with more precision the methods of work. The best plan would seem to be to devote half the year to the former method, and half the year to the latter method.

In certain branches of the subject, as, for instance, statistics, the seminar becomes a laboratory exercise. In the largest universities the statistical laboratory is equipped with all manner of mechanical devices, and the practical exercises take up a considerable part of the time. The statistical laboratories are especially designed to train the advanced student in the methods of handling statistical material.

(3) The Economics Club: The lecture work and the seminar are now frequently supplemented by the economics club, a more informal meeting of the advanced students, where they are free from the constraint that is necessarily present in the seminar, and where they have a chance to debate, perhaps more unreservedly, some of the topics taken up in the lectures and in the seminar, and especially the points where some of the students dissent from the lecturer. Reports on the latest periodical literature are sometimes made in the seminar and sometimes in the economics club; and the club also provides an opportunity for inviting distinguished outsiders in the various subjects. In one way or another, the economics club serves as a useful supplement to the lectures and the seminar, and is now found in almost all the leading universities.

In reviewing the whole subject we may say that the teaching of economics in American institutions has never been in so satisfactory condition as at present. Both the instructors and the students are everywhere increasing in numbers; and the growing recognition of the fact that law and politics are so closely interrelated with, and so largely based on, economics, has led to a remarkable increase in the interest taken in the subject and in the facilities for instruction.


Economics
— In the Schools —

James Sullivan, Ph.D., Principal of Boys’ High School, Brooklyn, N.Y.

This subject has been defined as the study of that which pertains to the satisfaction of man’s material needs, — the production, preservation, and distribution of wealth. As such it would seem fundamental that the study of economics should find a place in those institutions which prepare children to become citizens, — the elementary and high schools. Some of the truths of economics are so simple that even the youngest of school children may be taught to understand them. As a school study, however, economics up to the present time has made far less headway than civics (q.v.). Its introduction as a study even in the colleges was so gradual and so retarded that it could scarcely be expected that educators would favor its introduction in the high schools.

Previous to the appearance, in 1894, of the Report of the Committee of Ten of the National Educational Association on Secondary Education, there had been much discussion on the educational value of the study of economics. In that year Professor Patten had written a paper on Economics in Elementary Schools, not as a plea for its study there, but as an attempt to show how the ethical value of the subject could be made use of by teachers. The Report, however, came out emphatically against formal instruction in political economy in the secondary school, and recommended “that, in connection particularly with United States history, civil government, and commercial geography instruction be given in those economic topics, a knowledge of which is essential to the understanding of our economic life and development” (pp. 181-183). This view met with the disapproval of many teachers. In 1895 President Thwing of Western Reserve University, in an address before the National Educational Association on The Teaching of Political Economy in the Secondary Schools, maintained that the subject could easily be made intelligible to the young. Articles or addresses of similar import followed by Commons (1895), James (1897), Haynes (1897), Stewart (1898), and Taussig (1899). Occasionally a voice was raised against its formal study in the high schools. In the School Review for January, 1898, Professor Dixon of Dartmouth said that its teaching in the secondary schools was “unsatisfactory and unwise.” On the other hand, Professor Stewart of the Central Manual Training School of Philadelphia, in an address in April, 1898, declared the Report of the Committee of Ten “decidedly reactionary,” and prophesied that political economy as a study would he put to the front in the high school. In 1899 Professor Clow of the Oshkosh State Normal School published an exhaustive study of the subject of Economics as a School Study, going into the questions of its educational value, its place in the schools, the forms of the study, and the methods of teaching. His researches serve to show that the subject was more commonly taught in the high schools of the Middle West than in the East. (Compare with the article on Civics.)

Since the publication of his work the subject of economics has gradually made its appearance in the curricula of many Eastern high schools. It has been made an elective subject of examination for graduation from high schools by the Regents of New York State, and for admission to college by Harvard University. Its position as an elective study, however, has not led many students to take it except in commercial high schools, because in general it may not be used for admission to the colleges.

Its great educational value, its close touch with the pupils’ everyday life, and the possibility of teaching it to pupils of high school age are now generally recognized. A series of articles in the National Educational Association’s Proceedings for 1901, by Spiers, Gunton, Halleck, and Vincent bear witness to this. The October, 1910, meeting of the New England History Teachers’ Association was entirely devoted to a discussion of the Teaching of Economics in Secondary Schools, and Professors Taussig and Haynes reiterated views already expressed. Representatives of the recently developed commercial and trade schools expressed themselves in its favor.

Suitable textbooks in the subject for secondary schools have not kept pace with its spread in the schools. Laughlin, Macvane, and Walker published books somewhat simply expressed; but later texts have been too collegiate in character. There is still needed a text written with the secondary school student constantly in mind, and preferably by an author who has been dealing with students of secondary school age. The methods of teaching, mutatis mutandis, have been much the same as those pursued in civics (q.v.). The mere cramming of the text found in the poorest schools gives way in the best schools to a study and observation of actual conditions in the world of to-day. In the latter schools the teacher has been well trained in the subject, whereas in the former it is given over only too frequently to teachers who know little more about it than that which is in the text.

See also Commercial Education.

 

References: —

In Colleges and Universities: —

A Symposium on the Teaching of Elementary Economics. Jour. of Pol. Econ., Vol. XVIIl, June, 1910.

Cossa, L. Introduction to the Study of Political Economy: tr. by L. Dyer. (London, 1893.)

Mussey, H. R. Economies in the College Course. Educ. Rev. Vol. XL, 1910, pp. 239-249.

Second Conference on the Teaching of Economics, Proceedings. (Chicago, 1911.)

Seligman, E. R. A. The Seminarium — Its Advantages and Limitations. Convocation of the University of the State of New York, Proceedings. (1892.)

In Schools: —

Clow, F. R. Economics as a School Study, in the Economic Studies of the American Economic Association for 1899. An excellent bibliography is given. It may be supplemented by articles or addresses since 1899 which have been mentioned above. (New York, 1899.)

Haynes, John. Economics in Secondary Schools. Education, February, 1897.

 

Source: Paul Monroe (ed.), A Cyclopedia of Education, Vol. II. New York: Macmillan, pp. 387-392.

Source: E.R.A. Seligman in Universities and their Sons, Vol. 2 (1899), pp. 484-6.

 

Categories
Exam Questions History of Economics M.I.T. Suggested Reading Syllabus

M.I.T. History of Economic Thought. Misc. Readings and exams. Samuelson, 1973-78

 

Scattered across several folders in the Paul Samuelson Papers at Duke are course materials from the graduate history of economic course regularly offered by Samuelson in the 1970s. Not included below are a few class lecture handouts and class lists also in the folders. Instead I have just transcribed the suggested reading lists or Dewey library course reserve lists and two final exams found in the folders. 

I did not take this course, once having sat in on a Marxian economics lecture that consisted of Paul Samuelson commenting on his textbook’s appendix “Rudiments of Marxian Economics”. Perhaps the arrogance of my youth got the better of me, but I thought there were other courses that were going to teach me something that I had not already learned so I am now condemned to trying to reconstruct his course content from such scraps as these we find in his archival record. Maybe a visitor to this page of Economics in the Rear-view Mirror has saved notes from the course?

_________________

14.132 FALL 1973
HISTORY OF ECONOMIC THOUGHT
P. SAMUELSON

SUGGESTED READINGS

1. FOR BACKGROUND

T. Kuhn
THE STRUCTURE OF SCIENTIFIC REVOLUTION

and parts or all of any sample of secondary sources, such as those by Roll, Gray, Gide-Rist, brief Schumpeter (1912), Heilbroner.

FOR BIOGRAPHY

Keynes
ESSAYS IN BIOGRAPHY

Schumpeter
TEN ECONOMISTS

H. Spiegel
GREAT ECONOMISTS ON GREAT ECONOMISTS

2. BASIC BACKGROUND REFERENCE

Perhaps the basic background reference is the posthumous, uneven classic:
J. S. Schumpeter
HISTORY OF ECONOMIC ANALYSIS

A valuable, MIT-graduate-school kind of reference is
Marc Blaug
ECONOMIC THEORY IN RETROSPECT

3. ON RICARDO, you should at least sample

Sraffa edition
PRINCIPLES

Useful readings are:

Blaug

Baumol
ch 2 in ECONOMIC DYNAMICS

Stigler in
HISTORY OF ECONOMICS

Sraffa
his introduction to the PRINCIPLES

Kaldor
his brief section in 1954 RES “Alternative Theories of Distribution”

Models of Ricardo-like systems

Pasinetti
Samuelson
Edelberg

Source: Duke University. David M. Rubenstein Rare Book and Manuscript Library. Economists’ Papers Archive. Paul Samuelson Papers, Box 33, Folder “14.132 Fall 1973”.

_________________

14.132 FALL 1974
HISTORY OF ECONOMIC THOUGHT
P. SAMUELSON E 52-394

SUGGESTED READINGS

1. FOR BACKGROUND

T. Kuhn
THE STRUCTURE OF SCIENTIFIC REVOLUTION

and parts or all of any sample of secondary sources, such as those by Roll, Gray, Gide-Rist, brief Schumpeter (1912), Heilbroner, Cannan, Recktenwald’s POLITICAL ECONOMY: A HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE

FOR BIOGRAPHY

Keynes
ESSAYS IN BIOGRAPHY

Schumpeter
TEN ECONOMISTS

H. Spiegel
GREAT ECONOMISTS ON GREAT ECONOMISTS

2. BASIC BACKGROUND REFERENCE

Perhaps the basic background reference is the posthumous, uneven classic:
J. S. Schumpeter
HISTORY OF ECONOMIC ANALYSIS

A valuable, MIT-graduate-school kind of reference is
Marc Blaug
ECONOMIC THEORY IN RETROSPECT

3. First Topic of land and the interest rate: Turgot, Böhm-Bawerk and Keynes-Modigliani

Böhm-Bawerk, Vol I, Ch. 4
„Land and the Rate of Interest“: also Samuelson (1958, 1968, 1974)
Modigliani (1954, 1974)
Diamond (1965)

Source: Duke University. David M. Rubenstein Rare Book and Manuscript Library. Economists’ Papers Archive. Paul Samuelson Papers, Box 33, Folder “14.132 Fall 1973”.

_________________

14.132 Fall 1975
STORY OF ECONOMIC THOUGHT
P. A. SAMUELSON E52-394
FRIDAY 1:30-3:30

SUGGESTED READINGS

1. FOR BACKGROUND

Kuhn, The Structure of Scientific Revolution
and parts or all of any sample of secondary sources, such as those by Roll, Gray, Gide-Rist, brief Schupeter (1912), Heilbroner, Cannan’s Review of Economic Theory, Recktenwald’s Political Economy: A Historical Perspective.

FOR BIOGRAPHY

Keynes, Essays in Biography

Schumpeter, Ten Economists

H. Spiegel, Great Economists on Great Economists [not in Dewey Library]

2. BASIC BACKGROUND REFERENCE

Perhaps the basic background reference is the posthumous, uneven classic:
J. A. Schumpeter, History of Economic Analysis

A valuable, MIT-graduate-school kind of reference is
Mark Blaug, Economic Theory in Retrospect

For fruits of Marx’s hours in the British Museum, see
K. Marx, Theories of Surplus Value (many volumes, and sometimes called Vol. IV of Das Kapital)

Readable and scholarly essays are collected in
G. J. Stigler, Essays in the History of Economics

3. First topic of Quesnay’s Tableau Economique:

Any text like Gray, Peter Newman, Roll, Schumpeter;
Meek on Physiocracy, and edited volume;
A. Phillips, QJE, 1955;
S. Maital, QJE, 1972.

4. Topic of land and the interest rate: Turgot, Böhm-Bawerk and Keynes-Modigliani

Böhm-Bawerk, Vol I, Ch. 4, “Land and the Rate of Interest,” also,
Samuelson (1958, 1968, 1974)
Modigliani (1954, 1974)
Diamond (1965)

5. Modern model of Ricardo

6. Transformation problem of Marx

7. Smith, Adam

8. ….

Source: Duke University. David M. Rubenstein Rare Book and Manuscript Library. Economists’ Papers Archive. Paul Samuelson Papers, Box 33, Folder “14.132 Fall 1975”.

_________________

Samuelson
To be placed on reserve for 14.132

Mass. Inst. Tech.
FEB 14 1977
DEWEY RESERVE

McLellan. Karl Marx: His Life and Thought

Luxemburg. Accumulation of Capital

Sweezy. Theory of Capitalist Development

Robinson. An Essay on Marxian Economics

Dobbs. History of Theories of Distribution [sic, Theories of Value and Distribution since Adam Smith: Ideology and Economic Theory]

Morishima. On Marxian Economics [sic, Marx’s Economics]

Schumpeter. History of Economic Analysis

Roll. History of Economic Thought 

Alexander Gray. The Development of Economic Doctrine

[Metzler Lloyd] Festschrift. (Trade, Stability and Macroeconomics) edited by G. Horowitz and P. Samuelson.

Reprints

Samuelson

Samuelson’s “Reply on Marxian Matters”

Insight and Detour in the Theory of Exploitation: A Reply to Baumol

Understanding the Marxian Notion of Exploitation: A Summary of the So-Called Transformation Problem Between Marxian Values and Competitive Prices

Marx as a Mathematical Economist

 

Journals

Review of Economic Studies, Vol. 2, 1934-35

American Economic Review, March 1938.

 

[Appendix: Rudiments of Marxian Economics (from Samuelson Economics, pp. 858-)]

Source: Duke University. David M. Rubenstein Rare Book and Manuscript Library. Economists’ Papers Archive. Paul Samuelson Papers, Box 33, Folder “14.132 Spring 1977”.

_________________

14.132 Final Exam
History of Economic Thought
P. A. Samuelson
May 20, 1977

ANSWER (1) OR (2) QUESTIONS.

  1. Describe any aspects of the classical economists’ system that primarily interests you.
  2. Describe the doctrines of some one historical economist or school in which you have an interest.
  3. Analyze any aspects of Marxian economics that you think are of relevance to economic history and policy.

Source: Duke University. David M. Rubenstein Rare Book and Manuscript Library. Economists’ Papers Archive. Paul Samuelson Papers, Box 33, Folder “14.132 Spring 1977”.

_________________

Reserve List, MIT Libraries
14.132 History of Economic Thought
Spring 1978

D. L. Thomson, Adam Smith’s Daughters, Exposition Press, 1973.

L. Robbins. An Essay on the Nature and Significance of Economic Science. Macmillan, 1935 and 1962.

M. Blaug, Economic Theory in Retrospect. Richard D. Irwin, 1962.

I. H. Rima. Development of Economic Analysis. Irwin, 1972.

H. W. Spiegel,The Growth of Economic Thought. Prentice-Hall, 1971.

Alexander Gray, Development of Economic Doctrines. Longman, Green and Co. 1934.

T. W. Hutchinson, A Review of Economic Doctrines, 1870-1929. Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1953.

Thomas Sowell, Classical Economics Reconsidered, Princeton U. Press, 1974.

Eric Roll, A History of Economic Thought. Faber and Faber, 1973.

Eric Roll, The World After Keynes, Praeger, 1968.

J. A. Schumpeter, History of Economic Analysis. Oxford U. Press, 1954.

G. L. S. Shackle. The Nature of Economic Thought. Cambridge U Press, 1966.

J. A. Schumpeter, Ten Great Economists. Oxford, 1965.

R. L. Meek. Precursors of Adam Smith. Dear (London), 1973.

Source: Duke University. David M. Rubenstein Rare Book and Manuscript Library. Economists’ Papers Archive. Paul Samuelson Papers, Box 33, Folder “14.132 Spring 1978”.

_________________

14.132 Take-Home Exam
Spring 1978

Answer any one of these questions or any two or all three.

  1. Describe some topic covered in this course that you find to be of interest. Discuss its broad significance; or concentrate in depth on any aspect of the problem that you believe to be worth exploring. Do not hesitate to let your imagination soar.
  2. Describe some aspect or aspects of what we call neoclassical economics. If you wish, compare and contrast it with earlier classical economics; or with later Keynesian economics; or with the Marx-inspired economics that developed around the same time.
  3. Thomas Kuhn attempted to throw light on how the natural sciences tend to develop. If any part of his paradigms seems to you useful in any part of the history of economic thought, describe the use. If you have criticisms to make of the Kuhnian methodology, feel free to enlarge on them.

Source: Duke University. David M. Rubenstein Rare Book and Manuscript Library. Economists’ Papers Archive. Paul Samuelson Papers, Box 33, Folder “14.132 Spring 1977”.

Image Source:  Capture of the photos page from the Paul Samuelson memorial webpages at the MIT economics department (date of Wayback Machine capture May 22, 2011)

Categories
Exam Questions Harvard History of Economics Suggested Reading Syllabus

Harvard. Graduate history of political economy course. Taylor, 1948-49

 

 

Overton Hume Taylor served as the Harvard economics department’s one-man show of PPE interdisciplinarity at both the undergraduate and graduate level for about two decades covering the middle of the 20th century. Materials from six of his courses have already been posted.

Econ 1. (with Leontief and Chamberlin) Honors Economic Theory, 1939-40
Econ 1b. Intellectual Background of Economic Thought, 1941, [Final Exam for the Course]
Econ 115. (with Leontief) Programs of Social and Economic Reconstruction, 1942-43
Econ 115. Economic and Political Ideas, 1948 , [Mid-year Exam for Economic and Political Ideas]
Econ 111. (with others) Economics of Socialism, 1950
Econ 111. Socialism, 1955

Here is a link to Taylor’s A History of Economic Thought (1960) that puts between two covers much, if not all, of what he had to say about the history of economics, politics and philosophy. 

Kindred spirits are to be found behind the course syllabi by Louis Putterman at Brown (1995) and Michael Piore at M.I.T (1977) posted earlier.

_____________________

Course Enrollment

[Economics] 205a (formerly Economics 105a). Main Currents of Thought in Economics and Related Studies over Recent Centuries (F). Dr. O. H. Taylor.

Total 15: 4 Graduates, 3 Seniors, 6 Public Administration, 2 Radcliffe.

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College, 1948-49, p. 77.

_____________________

Course Syllabus

Main Currents of Thought in Economics and Related Studies over Recent Centuries
Economics 205a
1948-49

  1. September 30—October 7. Introduction: Plato and the Middle Ages; Hobbes and the Mercantilists

Reading: (1) Plato Republic, Book II; (2) Hobbes, Leviathan, Chs. 1, 6, 13, 14, 17, 18, 21, 24; (3) One of the following: Sir T. Mun, England’s Treasure; Sir J. Child, Discourses in Trade; Sir D. North, Discourse on Trade; or Locke, Interest and Money

Thursday, September 30, Introductory lecture.

Tuesday, October 5. Plato and the ancient-medieval antecedents of modern-western culture and economic thought. Modernity vs. medievalism; 17th century England; and Hobbes vs. Plato

Thursday, October 7. 17th century English mercantilism and economic theory

  1. October 14—21. Liberalism; Locke, the Physiocrats, and Adam Smith; and Benthamism

Reading: (1) O. H. Taylor, 2 articles on natural law ideas and economics, Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 44; (2) Locke, Civil Government, II, Chs. 2, 5, 7-12, inclusive; and (3) Adam Smith, Wealth of Nations, Chs. 1-7.

[Tuesday, October 12, Holiday]

Thursday, October 14. Liberalism and economic thought-varieties of former and their effects on latter—from early-modern times to the present

Tuesday, October 19. Ethical natural law and early-modern liberalism. Locke vs. Hobbes. Locke, Newton, and 18th century ideas of the natural order. Philosophies and economic theories of the Physiocrats and Adam Smith

Thursday, October 21. Benthamism. Utility and natural law. Utilitarian liberalism and classical economics

  1. October 26—November 4. Malthus and Ricardo; the Romantic Reaction: Comte; Early Socialism and J. S. Mill

Reading: (1) Ricardo, Principles of Political Economy, Chs. 11-6; (2) Sabine, History of Political Theory, Chs. 28, 29, 30, 34; (3) A. Comte, Positive Philosophy (translation, Martineau), Introd. Ch. 1; Book VI, 1, 2; and (4) J. S. Mill, Logic, Book VI.

Tuesday, October 26. (1) Malthus vs. the anarchist-socialists; (2) Ricardo’s Economic theory

Thursday, October 28. The romantic reaction against rationalism, science and liberalism. Political and economic ideas of the English romanticists. Special development of this outlook in Germany

Tuesday, November 2. Romanticism, positivism, and the main 18th century outlook-interrelations. The positivism of August Comte vs. liberalism and economic science

Thursday, November 4. (1) Pre-Marxian socialism; (2) J. S. Mill’s attempted synthesis

  1. November 9—18. Marxism

Reading: (1) Burns, Handbook of Marxism, Chs. 1, 13, 14, 22, 26, 29, 30; (2) Schumpeter, Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy, Part I.

Tuesday, November 9. “Utopian” socialism, Hegel, Ricardo, and Marx; and the Marxian theory of history

[Thursday, November 11, Holiday]

Tuesday, November 16. The Marxian economics—theory of capitalism

Thursday, November 18. The Marxian vision of the future beyond capitalism; and concluding remarks on Marxism

  1. November 23—December 7. Victorian Conservative Liberalism and Neo-Classical Economics

Reading: A. Marshall, Principles of Economics, Book I, Chs. 1 and 2; Appendices A, B; Book III; Book IV, Chs. 1-3 inclusive and 8-13 inclusive; Book V, Chs. 1-5 inclusive

Tuesday, November 23. How in late 19th century the classical liberalism, originally a radical, became a conservative ideology. Social Philosophy of conservative liberalism, and new developments of economic theory in this context after 1870

[Thursday, November 25, Holiday]

Tuesday, November 30. Utility economics and utilitarianism—the free price system and economic welfare. Marginal productivity and distributive justice—Clark and Carver. And neo-classical theories about capital, money, business cycles, monopoly, and economic progress.

Thursday, December 2. The development, value, and limitations of mathematical economics

Tuesday, December 7. The special views and system of Alfred Marshall

  1. December 9—16. Veblen; Chamberlin; and Keynes

Reading: Max Lerner; The Portable Veblen (Viking Library), pp. 215-297; 306-349; 377-395; 431-467

Thursday, December 9. Thorstein Veblen’s philosophy and sociology (called economics) vs. the main-tradition economics. His contributions to “institutional economics,” and to the “New Deal” and latter-day American  liberalism.”

Tuesday, December 14. Veblen vs. neo-classical theory of competition, and Chamberlin’s theory of monopolistic competition. Critique of latter as analysis, and in its bearings and problems of public policy.

Thursday, December 16. “Keynesianism” the decisive break with neo-classicism and the old economic-liberal orthodoxy. Its antecedents in the main tradition of economic theory, and relations to mercantilism, liberalism, and socialism. Its contribution to analysis and policy, and its limitations.

[Reading Period]

“Dr. Taylor will announce assignment in class.”

[Based on last examination question below, the reading period assignment would probably have been: David Wright, Democracy and Progress]

 

Source: Harvard University Archives. Syllabi, course outlines and reading lists in Economics, 1895-2003. Box 4, Folder “Economics, 1948-1949 (2 of 2)”.

_____________________

Final Examination

ECONOMICS 205a
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
1948-49

Write on four questions, including the first and last in the following list. Devote one hour to the first question, and one hour to one of the others, marking as such your two one-hour essays.

  1. Discuss the statements (a), (b), and (c) below—each in turn, briefly, indicating with reasons your agreement or disagreement. Then either select the one (if any) which you agree with, or otherwise state your own position on the problem; and apply (illustrate) that position through relevant comments on any two of the general patterns of political-and-economic thought considered in the course.
    1. “Historical study of the co-variation of economic with political thought refutes the scientific claims of economics. Economists have always divided into ‘schools,’ on political lines; and each ‘school’ has developed its own system of economic theory, in conflict with all others, and in a close tie-up with its own partisan, political philosophy.”
    2. “Economists have too often mingled and confused suggestions of their personal, philosophical and political opinions with their contributions to scientific, economic theory or analysis. But in reality the former have been irrelevant, the latter independent of them; and the competent economists of all political persuasions have converged to agreement in the field of the science itself.”
    3. “The political philosophies of economists have not as a rule made their economic theories by any means wholly unscientific or non-scientific, nor—however sharp the oppositions between the former—irreconcilable. But they have produced biased concentrations on the special groups of economic-scientific problems seen as important from the standpoints of the political philosophies; and made all economic theories partial analyses, disclosing means to desired ends.”
  2. “Unqualified adherence to the premise that ‘natural’ human behavior is simply rational pursuit of individual self-interest, would have logically obliged Adam Smith and the classical economists after him to follow Hobbes in supporting a ‘Totalitarian,’ despotic government as indispensable for civil peace and order; and to follow the ‘mercantilist’ writers in supporting economic controls by such a government, as indispensable for national prosperity and an orderly working of the national economy. The ‘liberal,’ political and policy views of Adam Smith and his followers required and had as their ultimate foundation, a belief—shared with Locke but not with Hobbes—that moral self-restraint in deference to the rights of others is a ‘natural,’ human disposition, capable of limiting self-interested action to what is consistent with it.” Discuss.
  3. “The entire main tradition of economic theory, in its development from the eighteenth through the nineteenth into the twentieth century, retained, in defiance of growing factual evidence, a strong optimistic bias about the free-competition market economy—identification of its equilibrium with a social-economic optimum—which had its sole origin in the eighteenth century’s optimistic, metaphysical belief in an harmonious, natural order.” Discuss.
  4. Discuss the apparent and often alleged intellectual debts or similarities of basic elements of (a) Ricardian classical economic theory, (b) the later body of ‘neo-classical’ theory emphasizing ‘marginal utility’ etc., and (c) Pigou’s and more recent theories of ‘welfare economics,’ to Bentham’s psychological, ethical, and social theories. What elements of each (a, b, and c) might appear to derive from ‘Benthamism,’ and what real similarities and significant differences do you see between them and the corresponding elements of the latter?
  5. Describe and discuss either (a) the English and German ‘romantic’ or (b) August Comte’s ‘positivistic’ line of attack upon the classical-liberal pattern of political-and-economic thought and its ‘eighteenth century philosophical foundation.’
  6. Compare and discuss Ricardo’s and Marx’s “labor theory of value”—explaining how each author developed, supported, construed, and used the theory; the points wherein you think they agreed or differed; and the points you would make in defense and/or criticism of each author’s theory.
  7. Outline, explain briefly, and discuss critically the main philosophical and economic-theoretical ingredients of the Marxian “dynamic” theory of evolving capitalism.
  8. “In the development of economic theory since its early classical period, the prevalence of a too single-minded pursuit of increasing logical precision and rigor, mistakenly conceived as the whole of scientific progress, has made theory increasingly abstract and decreasingly useful in the study of concrete, real problems.”
  9. Compare and contrast the Veblenian with the Marxian theory of the modern ‘capitalist’ culture, the ‘class’ conflict within it, why and how ‘business’ injures the economic welfare of society, and the kind of régime which should (and will or may) replace ‘capitalism’ in the future; and develop your own appraisal or critique of Veblen’s views on these matters.
  10. Write your own summary of and commentary on the central thesis of David Wright’s “Democracy and Progress,” concerning the historic method or secret of modern economic progress, and the cultural and political trends now menacing its continuance.

 

Source:  Harvard University Archives. Final Examinations, 1853-2001. Box 16, Papers Printed for Final Examinations: History, History of Religions, Government, Economics,…Military Science, Naval Science, Feb. 1949.

Image Source:  Overton Hume Taylor, Lecturer on Economics and Tutor. Harvard Class Album, 1939.

Categories
Columbia History of Economics Undergraduate

Columbia. Undergraduate History of Economics Syllabus, Assignments. Gregg, ca. 1951

 

 

In the Joseph Dorfman Papers Collection at Columbia University, the following materials for a General Studies economics course on the history of economics taught by Dorothy E. Gregg were found. Gregg was awarded an economics Ph.D. in 1951. Dissertation title: The exploitation of the steamboat–the case of Colonel John Stevens.

For the next post I have saved biographical and career information that I found in the process of my sleuthing to identify the mysterious “Dr. D. Gregg”. While she quite apparently never went farther in research concerning the history of economics, her course materials would indicate a fairly serious academic interest in the history of economics. Joseph Dorfman, who taught the graduate history of economics courses at Columbia, added her materials to his own teaching files.

 

_______________________________

G.S. ECONOMICS 11
HISTORY OF ECONOMIC THOUGHT
Fall Semester
GENERAL OUTLINE OF COURSE
(Dr. Gregg)

The chief object of this course “…is primarily to acquaint you with the way in which economics has developed as part of humanity’s struggle to deal with the problems that evolving social life has brought upon us, to deal with those problems by trying to think them out, by seeing how successive generations have faced their problems, what they thought to be the central points of difficulty, the matters of grave social concern, and how they have dealt with those problems to which they have attached such importance…One of the results of any survey of the development of economic doctrine is to show that in very large measure the important departures in economic theory have been intellectual responses to changing current problems. That is, the economic theorists who have counted most in the development of thought have been men who have been very deeply concerned with problems that troubled their generations. Their theories have…dealt definitely with what ought to be done…We have good ground for supposing that the further growth of our science will be shaped in very large measure by the appearance of how social problems and the reaction of trained minds toward those problems…The times in which we live are likely to produce a very considerable stimulus to the growth of economics…And those of you who are now young and looking forward to the future have…a peculiarly heavy responsibility to face, a responsibility of endeavoring to equip yourselves thoroughly for constructive work in a task which the world need to have solved fare more desperately than it needed such aid or was conscious of needing such aid in recent generations.”
(from class lecture by Professor Wesley Mitchell, Columbia University, 1934-35.)

Books and Materials

The required texts for the course are: (1) Eric Roll, A History of Economic Thought, 1947 ed., (Prentice-Hall), (2) Masterworks of Economics, edited by Leonard Dalton Abbott (Doubleday & Co.), (3) Selections from The Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences (Macmillan, 1 vol. edition).

Unless otherwise noted, the greater part of the reading in the course will be in reference books to be found either in Burgess Library on the fourth floor, southwest wing, of the Nicholas Murray Butler Library or in Business Library, second floor of Butler Library. The running outline of the course is supplied in a mimeographed syllabus.

Reading Assignments

(An asterisk (*) indicates the required readings; the other readings are recommended)

SECTION I – MEDIEVAL ECONOMICS

*Roll, Eric, pp. 33-57
Bloch, M. “Feudalism—European,” in E.S.S., vol. VI, pp. 203-210.
Pirenne, H., Economic and Social History of Medieval Europe, pp. 45-57, 58-67, ch. IV, chs. VI-VII; Medieval Cities (1939 ed.), chs. 7-8
*Tawney, R.H., Religion and the Rise of Capitalism, (35¢ Pelican ed.), ch. I, “The Medieval Background,” pp. 11-60

SECTION II—MERCANTILISM

*Roll, pp. 57-132
*Thomas Mun, “England’s Treasure by Foreign Trade,” in Masterworks in Economics, pp. 11-37
Hayes, C., “Nationalism,” E.S:S:, v. XI, pp. 241-8
Malynes, Gerald, Consuetudo, ch. 9
Cunningham, Growth of English Industry and Commerce, vol. 2, pp. 1-20, 25-52, 214-223

SECTION III—THE PHYSIOCRATS

*Roll, pp. 132-142
*Turgot, “Reflections on the Formation and Distribution of Wealth,” in Masterworks, pp. 39-61
Quesnay, F., Economic Works (ed, A. Oncken, 1888), pp. 305-378, 538

SECTION IV—THE PRECONCEPTIONS OF ECONOMICS

  1. The Basic Preconceptions of Economics
    1. The various strains

*Veblen, Thorstein, “The Preconceptions of Economic Science, I, II, and III,” in The Place of Science in Modern Civilization, pp. 82-179
Ayres, C.E., The Theory of Economic Progress, chs. 1-4
Polanyi, Karl, The Great Transformation, chs. 5-6
*Hamilton, Walton, “Competition,” E.S.S., v. 4, pp. 141-47
*Laski, H.J., “The Rise of Liberalism,” E.S.S., v. 1, pp. 103-124
Brinton, Crane, “The Revolutions,” E.S.S., v. 1, pp. 124-144
*Beard, C.A., “Individualism and Capitalism,” E.S.S., v. 1, pp. 145-63
Mannheim, Karl, Ideology and Utopia, ch. 4
*Cole, G.D.H., “Laissez-faire,” E.S.S., v. 9, pp. 15-20
*Sombart, Werner, “Capitalism,” E.S.S., v. 3, pp. 195-202
“Economics”, “Liberalism”, “Natural Law”, “Natural Harmony”, “Natural Order”, “Utilitarianism”, “Hedonism”, “Social Darwinism”, “Freedom of Contract”, “Liberty”, “Rationalism”, “Nationalism”, “Social Contract”, “Natural Rights”, “Property”, “Vested Interests”, in the Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences
*Becker, Carl, The Heavenly City of the Eighteenth Century Philosophers, ch. 2
*Hofstadter, Richard, Social Darwinism in American Thought, chs. 2-3, 10
Spencer, Herbert, “Poor Laws,” in Man Versus the State(1892 ed.), pp. 144-55
*Commons, J.R., Legal Foundations of Capitalism, chs. 7-9
Tawney, R.H., Religion and the Rise of Capitalism, ch. 4, pp. 164-226
Weber, Max, The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, chs. 2, 4-5
Robertson, H.M., Aspects of the Rise of Individualism, ch. 7
Parsons, Talcott, “Capitalism” in Recent German Literature: Sombart and Weber(an essay)
Sombart, Werner, The Quintessence of Capitalism, chs. 1-6
*Arnold, Thurman, The Folklore of Capitalism, chs. 1-5, 8-12
*Hogben, Lancelot, Retreat from Reason, chs. 2-3
Hawkins, Willard E., Castaways of Plenty: A Parable of Our Times(Basic Books)
Sumner, W.G., Folkways, ch. 15

    1. Utilitarianism, or the “felicific calculus”

“For political economy, ever since Adam Smith, has rested entirely on the thesis of the natural identity of interests. By the mechanism of exchange and the division of labour individuals, without desiring or knowing it, and while pursuing each his own interest, are working for the direct realization of the general interest.” (Eli Halévy, The Growth of Philosophic Radicalism,p. 16)

      1. Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832)
        *(1) Leslie Stephen, The English Utilitarians, [remaining half line smudged, illegible]
        (2) Eli Halévy, The Growth of Philosophic Radicalism, [remaining half line smudged, illegible]; Pt. II, ch. 3; Pt. III, ch. 1,4
        (3) Edwin A. Burtt, ed., The English Philosophers [remaining half line smudged, illegible]

(a) Bentham, “An Introduction to the Principles [remaining half line smudged, illegible] Legislation,” pp. 791-852

SECTION V—THE CLASSICAL SYSTEM

  1. Adam Smith (1725-1790)
    1. General

*Roll, pp. 143-183
*Smith, Adam, “The Wealth of Nations,” in Masterworks, pp. 63-189

    1. Value

Smith, Adam, The Wealth of Nations, Introduction and Plan of Work, and Bk. I, ch. 4 (last two pages), chs. 5-7 (Cannan’s ed., v. 1, pp. 30-40, 49-65)
Whittaker, Edmund, A History of Economic Ideas, pp. 95-108

    1. Wages

Smith, Adam, the Wealth of Nations, Bk. 1, chs. 8, 10, Pt. I (Cannan’s ed., v. 1, pp. 66-88, 101-120)
Cannan, Theories of Production and Distribution, pp. 199-200, 229-238, 359-362

    1. Profits

Smith, Adam, The Wealth of Nations, Bk. 1, ch. 9; Bk. 2, ch. 4 (Cannan’s ed., v. 1, pp. 89-100, 332-339)
Cannan, Theories of Production and Distribution, pp. 200-203, 276-279, 366-369

    1. Rent

Smith, Adam, The Wealth of Nations, Bk. 1, ch. 11, secs. 1 and 2, and “Conclusion of the Chapter” (Cannan’s ed., v. 1, pp. 45-175, 247-257)
Cannan, Theories of Production and Distribution, pp. 216-221, 310-312

    1. Capital

Smith, Adam, The Wealth of Nations, Bk. 2, “Introduction,” and chs. 1, 3, 5 (Cannan’s ed., v. I, pp. 259-269, 313-331, 340-354)
Cannan, Theories of Production and Distribution, pp. 53-89

MID-TERM EXAMINATION OF NOVEMBER 8. The questions on the exam will be drawn from the “Study Questions” at the end of the syllabus.

  1. The Period 1776-1817
    1. The Doctrine of Population

*Roll, pp. 207-211
*Malthus, T.R., An Essay on the Principle of Population, 1sted., chs. 1, 2, 8, 8-15; 7thed., Bk. 1, chs. 1-2; Bk. 2, ch. 13, Bk. 3, chs. 1-3; Bk 4, chs. 1, 3, OR Masterworks, pp. 191-270.
Bonar, J., “The Malthusiad: Fantasia Economica,” in Essays Contributed in Honor of John Bates Clark, pp. 22-28
Keene, James, “Two lectures on the subject of Machinery, delivered at the Bath mechanics’ institution; tending to prove that machinery is not the cause of the distress among the industrious classes; that the country is not over-populated; and that the real causes of the distress are within the power of the people to remove.” (1831, Seligman Library)

    1. The Doctrine of Diminishing Returns and of Rent

Cannan, Theories of Production and Distribution, pp. 147-168
*Whittaker, E., pp. 384-392
Malthus, T.R., “Observations on the Effects of the Corn Laws”
Malthus, T.R., “On the Policy of Restricting the Importation of Foreign Corn”
Malthus, T.R., “The Nature and Progress of Rent”

    1. Theories of Profit (Interest)
      1. The Residual Claimant Theory (Ricardo)
        *Whittaker, E., pp. 611-613
        Ricardo, D., “The Influence of a Low Price of Corn on the Profits of Stock” (reprinted in Ricardo’s Economic Essays, Gonner ed.)
      2. The Productivity Theory

Lauderdale, An Inquiry Into the Nature and Origin of Public Wealth
Boehm-Bawerk, Capital and Interest, Bk. 2, chs. 1-3 (to p. 149)
*Cannan, Theories of Production and Distribution, pp. 107-109, 203-204

  1. David Ricardo (1772-1823)
    1. General

*Roll, pp. 183-207
*Ricardo, “Principles of Political Economy and Taxation,” in Masterworks, pp. 271-342
Mitchell, W.C., “Postulates and Preconception of Ricardian Economics,” in Essays in Philosophy, ed. By T.V. Smith and W.K. Wright
Stephen, Leslie, The English Utilitarians, v. 2, ch. 5

    1. Value

Ricardo, D., Principles of Political Economy, chs. 1, 4, 20, 28, 30
Hollander, J.H., “The Development of Ricardo’s Theory of Value,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, v. 18, pp. 455-491, Aug., 1904
McCracken, H.L., Value Theory and Business Cycles, ch. 1
Whitaker, A.C., History and Criticism of the Labor Theory of Value, ch. 5

    1. Rent

Ricardo, D., Principles of Political Economy, chs. 2, 3, 24, 32
Cannan, Theories of Production and Distribution, pp. 225-227, 321-332

    1. Wages

Ricardo, D., Principles of Political Economy, ch. 5
Cannan, Theories of Production and Distribution, pp. 242-257
Wermel, M.T., The Evolution of Classical Wage Theory, pp. 153-161

    1. Profits

Ricardo, D., Principles of Political Economy, chs. 11, 21
Boehm-Bawerk, pp. 87-95
Cannan, Theories of Production and Distribution, pp. 279-291, 339-354

  1. Thomas Robert Malthus (1766-1834)
    1. General

*Roll, Eric, pp. 212-226
Patten, T.N., “Malthus and Ricardo,” in Essays in Economic Theory
Stephen, Leslie, The English Utilitarians, chs. 4, 6

    1. Value

*Malthus, T.R., Principles of Political Economy, 2nded., Bk. 1, chs. 2,6

    1. Rent

Malthus, T.R., Principles of Political Economy, Bk. 1, ch. 3
Whittaker, E., pp. 502-503

    1. Wages

Malthus, T.R., Principles of Political Economy, Bk. 1, ch. 4
Cannan, Theories of Production and Distribution, pp. 257-259
Wermel, M.T., The Evolution of Classical Wage Theory, pp. 139-152

    1. Profits and Capital

Malthus, T.H., Principles of Political Economy, Bk. 1, ch. 6; Bk. 2, ch. 1; secs. 3,5

SECTION VI—REACTION AGAINST CLASSICISM

  1. The Romantics.

*Roll, Eric, pp. 226-248
Dorfman, Joseph, The Economic Mind in American Civilization, v. 1, pp. 382-397; OR Johnson, E.A.J., Some Origins of the Modern Economic World, pp. 126-141

  1. Early Social Criticism
    1. General

*Roll, pp. 248-270

    1. Utopian Socialism
      1. Robert Owen

*Owen, Robert, “A New View of Society”, in Masterworks, pp. 343-378
Beer, M., History of British Socialism, v. 1, pp. 160-181
Laidler, H.W., History of Socialist Thought, ch. 10
“Owen and Owenism”, in E.S.S.

      1. Fourier

Fourier, C., Selections from the Works of Fourier (esp. “Introduction”)
Laidler, H.W., History of Socialist Thought, pp. 69-74, 123-133
Ely, R.T., French and German Socialism, ch.. 5
**Fourier and Fourierism” and “Brook Farm” in E.S.S.

  1. Karl Marx (1818-1883) and Friedrich Engels (1820-1895)
    1. General

*Roll, Eric, pp. 271-324.
*Marx, Karl, „Capital“ in Masterworks, pp. 453-614

    1. Marxian Philosophy and Interpretation of History

Handbook of Marxism, ed. by Emile Burns, pp. 21-59, 209-231, 240-301, 370-401, 537-547, 634-673.
Strachey, John, The Theory and Practice of Socialism, chs. 28-32
___________, The Coming Struggle for Power, chs. 1,2

    1. Value and Surplus Value; the Machinery of Capitalist Exploitation

Handbook of Marxism, pp. 405-275, 547-552.
Marx, Capital, v. 3, chs. 1-3, 8-10.
Engels, F., Herr Eugen Dühring’s Revolution in Science (International Publishers, ed.), pp. 211-250
*Dobb, Maurice, Political Economy and Capitalism, chs. 1, 3
Cole, G.D.H., What Marx Really Meant, chs. 7,8
*Sweezy, Paul, The Theory of Capitalist Development, ch. 4

    1. The Laws of Capitalist Development

Handbook of Marxism, pp. 475-547, 552-570
*Dobb, Maurice, Political Economy and Capitalism, ch. 4
*Sweezy, chs. 8, 9, 12
*Lenin, N., “Imperialism”
Cole, G.D.H., What Marx Really Meant, chs. 3,4
Strachey, John, The Coming Struggle for Power, Pt. II, Pt. IV

    1. Criticism of Marxian Theory

*Veblen, T., “The Socialist Economics of Karl Marx, I and II,” in The Place of Science in Modern Civilization, pp. 409-456.
Skelton, O.D., Socialism: A Critical Analysis, chs. 5-7
Boehm-Bawerk, Karl Marx and the Close of His System

  1. Heterodox Socialism
    1. Revisionism

Loucks, and Hoot, Comparative Economic Systems, ch. 15
*Laidler, H.W., History of Socialist Thought, chs. 20-21
Bernstein, E., Evolutionary Socialism

    1. Fabian Socialism

Fabian Tracts, No. 7, 70, 142, 147, 159, 164
*Fabian Essays, pp. 3-29, 131, 149, 173-201
Webb, S. and B., A Constitution for the Socialist Commonwealth of Great Britain
Laidler, H.W., History of Socialist Thought, chs. 17-18, 29

    1. Revolutionary Socialism (non-Marxist brand)

Laidler, H.W., History of Socialist Thought, ch. 22
Estey, J.A., Revolutionary Syndicalism, ch. 5
*Sorel, G., Reflections on Violence

 

G.S. HISTORY OF ECONOMIC THOUGHT
Fall Semester
STUDY QUESTIONS

SECTION I-MEDIEVAL ECONOMICS

    1. Outline the social structure of medieval Europe and the economic organization of the manorial economy.
    2. Trace the development of the medieval concept of “just price” as the beginning of a theory of value.
    3. Trace the evolution of the attitude of the medieval church toward usury.
    4. Trace the evolution of the attitude of the medieval church toward commerce and trade.
    5. What were the most powerful economic forces leading to the breakdown of medieval society?

SECTION II—MERCANTILISM

    1. Discuss the thesis that mercantilism can be explained primarily in terms of state-making. Do you agree?
    2. Discuss the thesis that mercantilism can be explained primarily in terms of the national and international power struggles of the rising bourgeoisie. Do you agree?
    3. Discuss the mercantilist attitude toward; (a) money (b) interest (c) international trade (d) domestic industry (c) wages (f) population.
    4. Distinguish between bullionism and mercantilism proper.
    5. Compare and contrast mercantilism and the classical economic system.

SECTION III—THE PHYSIOCRATS

    1. Discuss the meaning of the phrase “produit net.” Compare this concept with the labor theory of value and surplus value.
    2. Analyze the circulation of this “produit net” as set forth in Quesnay’s “Tableau oeconomique”
    3. What role did agriculture play in the physiocratic theoretical structure? Give reasons for this.
    4. Compare and contrast physiocracy and the classical economic system.

SECTION IV—THE PRECONCEPTIONS OF ECONOMICS

  1. The Basic Preconceptions
    1. The various strains
      1. Trace the importance of the following concepts for the development of the classical economic system:
        (1) Protestant Ethics
        (2) rationalism
        (3) natural order
        (4) individualism
        (5) laissez-faire
        (6) liberalism
        (7) competition, scarcity, and the survival of the fittest
        (8) Social Darwinism
      2. Compare Sombart’s and Weber’s explanations of the main forces leading to the rise and development of capitalism.
    2. Utilitarianism, or the “felicific calculus”
      1. Distinguish between the “Westminster philosophy” and the “Manchester philosophy”, showing the utilitarian roots of each. What major differences in policy flowed from these two schools?
      2. Which school triumphed in England? What social and economic forces brought this about and what were the consequences of the triumph?
      3. According to Bentham, what are the forces which control human behavior and how are these forces to be measured?
      4. What are the major difficulties in Bentham’s theory of human nature? Explore the full implications of Bentham’s theory of human nature.
      5. Discuss Halévy’s statement that “political economy, ever since Adam Smith has rested entirely on the thesis of the natural identity of interests.”
      6. What is the basic paradox of the thesis of the natural identity of interests?

SECTION V—THE CLASSICAL SYSTEM

  1. Adam Smith
    1. State or describe the preconceptions and assumptions of Adam Smith’s system of economic thought.
    2. How did Adam Smith define and measure the wealth of a nation? Can you suggest reasons for his particular definition and measurement? Summarize briefly what Smith regarded as the causes of the wealth of nations and note the implications of his argument.
    3. Develop Smith’s theory of economic order.
    4. State Smith’s theory (or theories) of value.
    5. Develop in some detail Smith’s theory of distribution, noting his concepts of the distributive shares, the determinants of each, and contradictory elements in this theory.
    6. Develop and analyze critically Smith’s theories (a) of saving, and (b) of capital.
    7. Discuss Smith’s theory of production.
  1. The Period 1776-1817
    1. Account for Malthus’ first essay on population and develop the doctrine expounded in the first essay.
    2. What are the chief differences between the first and the second essays?
    3. Appraise the validity of Malthus’ doctrine of population.
    4. Discuss the development during this period of the doctrines of diminishing returns and of rent. Explain both doctrines.
    5. Describe the evolution of the doctrine of diminishing returns.
    6. Why did the classical economists develop the doctrine of diminishing returns solely in relation to production on land? On what grounds did West argue that technological progress could not offset diminishing returns in agriculture? Note weaknesses in this argument.
    7. Compare the theory of rent developed by Sir Edward West in his Essay on the Application of Capital to Land with Malthus’ theory as developed in his essay on The Nature and Progress of Rent.
    8. Discuss the development of Ricardo’s theory of profits ad describe its nature.
    9. State and criticize Lauderdale’s productivity theory of interest.
  1. David Ricardo
    1. State or describe the preconceptions and assumptions of Ricardo’s system of economic thought.
    2. Explain carefully Ricardo’s theory of value, noting its nature, the assumption on which it is based, the problems involved in this type of theory and Ricardo’s solution of them.
    3. What is the significance of the labor theory of value as found in Adam Smith and Ricardo? What are the major differences? Account for the decline of the labor theory of value after Ricardo.
    4. How did Ricardo explain the nature, the existence and the amount of rent? What was his explanation of the relation between ret and prices?
    5. Develop and criticize Ricardo’s theory of wages.
    6. Develop Ricardo’s theory of capital. In what sense is classical theory essentially a theory of capital? How do you account for the particular form which the classical theory of capital formation assumed? On what grounds is this theory subject to criticism?
    7. Explain Ricardo’s theory of economic development. Give the theoretical reasons for his conclusions.
  1. Thomas Robert Malthus
    1. Compare Malthus’ theory of value with that of Ricardo, and account for the difference between them.
    2. With reference to the theory of rent, what were the points of difference between Ricardo and Malthus? What conclusions did each draw from his rent theory?
    3. Develop Malthus’ theory of wages.
    4. Develop Malthus’ theories of saving, capital, and profits. Compare the theories of profits of Ricardo and Malthus. How do you account for the differences between them?
    5. Compare Ricardo and Malthus as to their theories of the effects of capital formation on economic progress and the functioning of the capitalist economy.
    6. Show how in Ricardian economics the business cycle is impossible and how in Malthusian economics it is inevitable.

SECTION VI—REACTION AGAINS CLASSICISM

  1. The Romantics
    1. What were the chief economic forces leading to the rise of the German romantic movement?
    2. Trace a similar development in American economic history in the writings of Mathew Carey and Henry Carey.
    3. What were the major economic doctrines of: (a) Adam Muller, (b) J.G. Fichte, (c) Friedrich List.
  2. Early Socialist Criticism
    1. General
      1. It is sometimes claimed that economic theory is a rationalization of class interests. With reference to classical theory, is there any evidence that this characterization is warranted? If so, what? Would you agree that economic theory can properly be so characterized? Support your position.
      2. Discuss the major criticisms of the weaknesses of capitalism as set forth by Sismondi and evaluate his remedies.
      3. Discuss the major criticisms of the weaknesses of capitalism as set forth by Proudhon and evaluate his remedies.
    2. Utopian Socialism
      1. Outline succinctly Owen’s economic theory.
      2. Outline clearly Fourier’s economic system
      3. Discuss the major differences between Fourier and Owen
      4. What are the chief criticisms of utopian socialism? How valid do you think these criticisms are? Why?
  3. Karl Marx and Friederich Engels
    1. What does Marx mean by (a) forces of production (b) relations of production (c) the class struggle (d) classes? How does he use these concepts in his system of thought?
    2. Define the following terms as used by Marx: (a) use value, (b) exchange value (c) value (d) constant capital (e) variable capital (f) surplus value (g) price of production.
    3. Discuss Marx’s labor theory of value and compare it with Ricardo’s and Smith’s theories of value.
    4. Describe the so-called “great contradiction” in Marx’s labor theory of value and the way in which Marx resolved the contradiction.
    5. Discuss the origin of surplus value and the significance of this concept for Marxian theory.
    6. Discuss Marx’s theory of capitalist competition and the consequences of this. Do you find anything comparable in Ricardo?
    7. Discuss Marx’s theory of economic development and also Lenin’s contribution.
    8. Contrast Ricardo’s explanation of the falling tendency of the rate of profits with Marx’s explanation of the falling tendency of the rate of profits. What conclusions did Marx draw from this theory?
    9. Compare Marx’s theory of crises with Malthus’ theory of market gluts.
    10. Discuss: “Marxist economics is the economics of capitalism; orthodox economics of socialism.”
  4. Heterodox Socialism
    1. What is meant by evolutionary socialism? Describe briefly the chief points of difference between evolutionary socialism and Marxian socialism.
    2. Develop or outline the economic theory of the Fabian socialists. Criticize carefully the main arguments.
    3. On what grounds and in what respects did the revisionists and evolutionary socialists criticize the Marxian analysis and program? What programs of change did these critics set forth? Evaluate these programs.
    4. Describe briefly the chief points of difference between Marxism and the non-Marxist brand of revolutionary socialism (such as syndicalism). In what places in the world has revolutionary socialism had an important following? Why?

*  * *  *  *  *

HISTORY OF ECONOMIC THOUGHT
[Handwritten: “D. Gregg”]

Selected List of Histories of Economic Thought and Other Reference Works

Ashley, W.J., “Introduction to English Economic History and Theory.”
Beer, Max, “An Inquiry into Physiocracy.”
Beer, Max, “Early British Economics.”
Beer, Max, “History of British Socialism.”
Blanqui, J.A., “History of Political Economy.”
Bonar, James, “Philosophy and Political Economy.”
Boucke, O.F., “The Development of Economics, 1750-1900.”
Burtt, Edwin A., “Metaphysical Foundations of Modern Science.”
Cannan, Edwin, “A Review of Economic Theory.”
Commons, J.R., “Legal Foundations of Capitalism.”
Cunningham, William, “Early Writings on Politics and Economics.”
Feguson, J.M., “Landmarks of Economic Thought.”
Gambs, “Beyond Supply and Demand.”
Gide, C., and C. Rist, “History of Economic Doctrines.”
Gray, Alexander, “The development of Economic Doctrine.”
Gruchy, A.G., “Modern Economic Theory.”
Halévy, Elie, “Growth of Philosophical Radicalism.”
Haney, L.H., “History of Economic Thought.” (3rdrev. ed.)
Heckscher, Eli F., “Mercantilism.”
Homan, P.T., “Contemporary Economic Thought.”
Ingram, J.K., “History of Political Economy.”
Johnson, E.A.J., “Predecessors of Adam Smith.”
Laidler, H.W., “History of Socialist Thought.”
Loucks, W.N., and J.W. Hoot, “Comparative Economic Systems”
Palgrave, R.T. (ed), “Dictionary of Political Economy.”
Patterson, S.H., “Readings in the History of Economic Thought.”
Peck, Harvey W., “Economic Thought and its Institutional Background.”
Price, L.L., “A Short History of Political Economy in England from Adam Smith to Alfred Marshall.”
Robertson, H.M. “Aspects of the Rise of Individualism.”
Roll, Eric, “A History of Economic Thought.” (1947 rev. ed.)
Scott, W.A., “Development of Economics.”
Seligman, E.R.A., and A. Johnson (eds.), “Encyclopaedia of the Social Sciences.””
Sombart, Werner, “The Quintessence of Capitalism.”
Spann, Othmar, “The History of Economics.”
Spann, Othmar, “Types of Economic Theory.”
Stephen, Leslie, “The English Utilitarians.”
Strong, Gordon, B., “Adam Smith and the 18thcentury Conception of Progress.”
Tawney, R.H., “The Acquisitive Society.”
Tawney, R.H., “Religion and the Rise of Capitalism.”
Weber, Max, “General Economic History.”
Weber, Max, “The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism.”
Wermel, “The Evolution of Classical Wage Theory.”
Whittaker, Edmund, “A History of Economic Ideas.”
Dorfman, “The Economic Mind in American Civilization”

Selected List of Critical Works

Ayres, C.E., “The Theory of Economic Progress.”
Boehm-Bawerk, E. von, “Capital and Interest.”
Boucke, O.F., “A Critique of Economics. ”
Cannan, E., “A History of the Theories of Production and Distribution in English Political Economy from 1776 to 1848.”
Cannan, E., “A Review of Economic Theory.”
McCracken, H.L., “Value Theory and Business Cycles.”
Polanyi, Karl, “The Great Transformation.”
Spann, Othmar “The History of Economics.”
Taussig, F.W., “Wages and Capital.”
Triffin, R., “Monopolistic Competition and General Equilibrium Theory.”
Veblen, Thorstein, “The Place of Science in Modern Civilization.”
Whitaker, A.C., “History and Criticism of the Labor Theory of Value,” in Columbia Univ. Studies in History, Economics, and Public Law, vol. 19.

Source:  Columbia University Libraries, Manuscript Collections. Joseph Dorfman Collection. Box 13

 

 

 

 

 

 

Categories
Economists Harvard History of Economics Northwestern

Harvard. Economics Ph.D. alumnus Homer Bews Vanderblue, 1915

 

Homer Bews Vanderblue (Harvard Ph.D., 1915) won his academic spurs for work on the economics of railroads. He went on to become the Dean of the School of Commerce at Northwestern. Before leaving for Northwestern in 1939 he donated his personal collection of Adam Smith materials to the Harvard Business School’s Baker Library.

_______________________

Homer Bews Vanderblue’s Ph.D. exams at Harvard

General Examination in Economics, Monday, May 11, 1914.
Committee: Professors Taussig (chairman), Turner, Sprague, Day, and Dr. Copeland.
Academic History: Northwestern University, 1907-12; Harvard Graduate School, 1912—. A.B., Northwestern, 1911; A.M. ibid., 1912. Assistant in Economics, Harvard, 1913—.
General Subjects: 1. Economic Theory and its History. 2. Statistics. 3. History of American Institutions since 1789. 4. Economic History since 1750. 5. Commercial Organization. 6. Transportation.
Special Subject: Transportation.
Thesis Subject: “Railroad Valuation.” (With Professor F. W. Taussig and Mr. E. J. Rich.)

Source: Harvard University Archives. Harvard University, Examinations for the Ph.D. (HUC 7000.70), Folder “Examinations for the Ph.D., 1913-14”.

Note:  Thesis published as Railroad Valuation, Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1917.  It was awarded second prize ($500) in Class A of the Hart, Schaffner & Marx competition.

_______________________

From the 1941 Harvard Business School Yearbook

Homer Bews Vanderblue
Honorary Curator of Early Economic Literature

Degrees: A.B., 1911; A.M., 1912, Northwestern University; Ph.D., 1915 Harvard University.

History in Brief: Instructor in Economics, Harvard College, 1914-15; Assistant Professor, Associate Professor and Professor of Transportation, Northwestern University, 1915-22; Research Director, Denver Civic and Commercial Association, 1920-21; Economist and Director, Harvard University Committee on Economic Research, 1922-29; Professor of Business Economics, 1922-29; Vice President, Tri-Continental Corporation, New York City, 1929-37; Member, Library Committee, College of William and Mary since 1936; Member, Committee on Economic Bibliography, British Academy since 1937; Honorary Curator of Early Economic Literature since 1936; Dean of College of Commerce, Northwestern University since 1939.

Source: Harvard University, The Harvard Business School Yearbook, 1941, page 37.

_______________________

Death notice from Harvard College President’s Annual Report

Homer Bews Vanderblue, Honorary Curator of Early Economic Literature in the Baker Library, died on July 12, 1952, in his sixty-fourth year. His first appointment at the University was as Assistant in Economics and Proctor in 1913-14. He became Instructor in Economics in 1914-15. Until 1922, he taught at Northwestern University as Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, and Professor of Transportation. From 1922 until his resignation in 1929, he was Professor of Business Economics, and from 1936 until his death he filled the post of Honorary Curator of Early Economic Literature in the Baker Library. He returned to Northwestern as Professor of Business Economics and Dean of the School of Commerce (1939-49).

 

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College and reports of departments, 1951-52, pp. 49-50.

_______________________

Vanderblue as Head of Northwestern’s School of Commerce

Homer Vanderblue becomes the fifth dean of the School of Commerce. Vanderblue proves to be a successful academic and administrative leader, keeping the school functioning during the resource shortages associated with World War II when most business schools curtailed their operations or suspended instruction entirely.

Under Dean Vanderblue, the school shifts away from technical specialization toward a broader managerial education. To accomplish this shift—which would take years to complete—Vanderblue introduces the “rotating chairs” system for academic department heads, thus sidestepping department rigidity. He recruits faculty sympathetic to his goals and ideals of “liberal business education.”

Vanderblue also works to bridge the fiscal gap between what the school generates for the university and what it earns to meet its expenses. Among other things, Vanderblue proposes raising faculty salaries, which had declined during the depression, and constructing new buildings in Evanston and Chicago. Vanderblue admits that to retain the best faculty, he has to draw upon loyalty to Northwestern by “playing on the ‘I love Evanston’ key” to retain the best senior professors, something he is able to do in many cases.

Dean Vanderblue retires due to ill health in 1949.

 

Source: Northwestern University, Webpage: “Kellogg School History: 1938-1947.”

_______________________

Adam Smith—Vanderblue Collection

Baker Library has brought together one of the most comprehensive collections of the works of Adam Smith in the world, with a special focus on The Wealth of Nations. This collection contains virtually all published editions in English of this work, The Theory of Moral Sentiments, and Essays on Philosophical Subjects as well as translations into Chinese, French, Russian, and numerous other languages. Further, it holds many of Smith’s other published materials, manuscript letters, and several volumes from Smith’s own library. Harvard Business School Professor Homer B. Vanderblue donated the collection in 1939.

Source: https://www.library.hbs.edu/Find/Collections-Archives/Special-Collections/Collections/European-Economic-History-Philosophy-Kress-Collection/Adam-Smith-Vanderblue-Collection

Image Source: Homer Bews Vanderblue from the 1946 volume of the Northwestern University yearbook Syllabus. Colorized by Economics in the Rear-view Mirror.

Categories
Columbia Economists Exam Questions History of Economics

Columbia. Classical Economics Exam by J.M. Clark. 1951

John Maurice Clark

John Maurice Clark taught a history of economic theory sequence at Columbia University that had its origins in a similar course that had been taught earlier by Wesley Clair Mitchell. On the back of Clark’s examination questions for the first session of the 1950-51 academic year one finds a list of names and grades that we can strongly presume constitute the grade distribution for the course. 43 students were listed by John Maurice Clark in his handwritten grade sheet for the first semester of formative types of economic theory, of whom 26 received grades (3.12 average on a 4 point scale, median 3.17). Mark Blaug, whose magnum opus Economic Theory in Retrospect has served as a staple of the analytic narrative of the evolution of economics, received only a grade of B- (2.67) which put him tied with two other students at rank 21. A few years later Blaug was to find his mentor and dissertation adviser, George Stigler.

The later Congressional Research Service economist John P. Hardt (Columbia Ph.D., 1954) was  on the list but not awarded a grade for the course.

Oops it happens every so often, I have repeated myself. The original posting along with another year’s examination can be found here.

_____________________

Course Announcement

Economics 115-116 — Formative types of economic theory.
3 points each session. Professor Clark.
M. W. 12. 313 Fayerweather.

Readings and critical discussion of outstanding examples of the parent stock of classical economics with some regard to historical setting, and of subsequent outstanding contributions.

Source: Columbia University. Announcement of the Faculty of Political Science for the Winter and Spring Sessions 1950-51, p. 46.

_______________________________

Course Description

Economics 115-116—Formative types of economic theory. 3 points each session. Professor Clark.

M.W. 12.         313 Fayerweather.

Readings and critical discussion of outstanding examples of the parent stock of classical economics, with some regard to historical setting, and of subsequent outstanding contributions.

Source:   Columbia University. Announcement of the Faculty of Political Science for the Winter and Spring Sessions 1950-51, p. 46.

_______________________________

Take-Home Examination Questions

Economics 115
Final Examination
January, 1951

Answer any two questions, taking about the time for the actual writing that a regular examination would take. Those who do the work during Christmas holidays will please return papers January 8; others Friday, January 26, unless otherwise specified.

  1. Do the views of ancient writers (Hebrew, Greek or Roman) afford the same kind of evidence as the writings of modern economists as to economic conditions and practices of their time?
  2. Discuss extent of applicability of medieval doctrine on price; variations or relaxations; and how far the doctrine was effective in practice.
  3. Explain and appraise Quesnay’s “Tableau Économique”.
  4. State key doctrines of the Physiocrats and indicate how they could be regarded as adaptations to an historical situation.
  5. Compare views of Smith and Ricardo on the relation of labor to value.
  6. Compare treatment of rent in Smith, Malthus and Ricardo.
  7. On what grounds did Adam Smith sanction departures from laissez-faire?
  8. Topic: dominant conceptions of what economic activity is for. Compare the dominant conception (or at most a few dominant conceptions) of as many of the following as you feel you can reasonably cover: typical Mercantilists, Physiocrats, Ricardo, John Stuart Mill.
  9. What does Bentham’s theory contribute to the basic rationale of economics, aside from his ideas on economic matters themselves? (Book V of J. S. Mill’s “Principles of Political Economy” might contain hints.)
  10. State doctrines of Ricardo which had roots in historical conditions of the time, and indicate the connection.
  11. Compare Ricardo’s treatment of value with either Adam Smith’s or John Stuart Mill’s.
  12. What were the sources of J. S. Mill’s departure from strict Ricardianism?

_______________________________

Probable Grade Distribution

Letter Grade

 Number of students
A

2

A to A-

 1
A-

5

B+

 5
B

6

B to B-

 1
B-

2

C+

 1
C

3

Note:  Mark Blaug received the B to B- grade.

Source: Columbia University Archives. John M. Clark Papers. Box 24 (Courses Misc.), Unlabeled Folder.

Image Source: Portrait of John Maurice Clark from the collection of portraits of economists presented in 1997 as a gift to the Department of Economics of Duke University by Professor Warren J. Samuels of Michigan State University. Free use of these portraits in Web documents, and for other educational purposes, is encouraged: users are requested to acknowledge that the images come from The Warren J. Samuels Portrait Collection at Duke University.

Categories
Bibliography Courses Harvard History of Economics Suggested Reading Syllabus Undergraduate

Harvard. History of Economic Thought. Fellner, 1950

 

 

To William John Fellner (1905-1983) I personally owe my career-long interest in the history of economics. He agreed to meet with me for a year in a one-on-one tutorial upon my request since Yale did not offer a course in the history of economics then (1971-72). 

I discovered the following Harvard syllabus that I only recently realized was for a course actually given by my mentor, apparently to help satisfy the continuing demand of Harvard undergraduates for history of economics following Schumpeter’s death in January 1950.

Because I owe so much to William Fellner, in his honor I have gone to the trouble of providing links to as many of the items on his syllabus and bibliography as I could find (in a half-day).

Between us, this is not a particulary well-crafted or imaginative selection of assigned readings and the bibliography is clearly a rush-job. But this nonetheless demonstrates that Fellner was on a mission to integrate the history of economics with the teaching of the principles of economics which he did at Yale through ca. 1970 as reflected in his book Emergence and Content of Modern Economic Analysis, New York: McGraw-Hill, 1960.

______________________________________

If you find this posting interesting, here is the complete list of “artifacts” from the history of economics I have assembled. You can subscribe to Economics in the Rear-View Mirror below. There is also an opportunity for comment following each posting….

______________________________________

 

Economics 100.
History of Economic Thought

Half-course (fall term). Tu., Th., and (at the pleasure of the instructor) Sat., at 9. Professor Fellner (University of California).

 

Source: Official Register of Harvard University. Vol. XLVII, No. 23 (September 1950): Final Announcement of the Courses of Instruction Offered by the Faculty of the Arts and Sciences During 1950-51, p. 79.

______________________________________

 

1950-51
Economics 100
Fall Term

History of Economic Thought

In addition to the textbook assignments here listed, students will be required to do some amount of reading in the works of the writers who will be discussed in the course. The students will have a limited range of choice in this respect.

The textbook assignments here listed are not quite final. Some adjustments will presumably be made to include writers who will be discussed in the course but are not covered, or are covered inadequately, by the present assignments. Also, Assignment XI is too long and will be shortened so as to have it correspond to the classroom discussion.

 

I. Economic Ideas of Greek Philosophers

Gray, Ch. 1

II. Economic Ideas of St. Thomas Aquinas

Gray, Ch. 2

III. Mercantilism

Gray, Ch. 3

IV. The Physiocrats

Gide-Rist, Book I, Ch. 1

V. Adam Smith

Gide-Rist, Book I, Ch. 2

VI. Malthus and Ricardo

Gide-Rist, Book I, Ch. 3

VII. Early Expressions of “Neo-classical” Ideas

Gray, Ch. 7, pp. 190-197; Ch. 8, pp. 238-248; Ch. 10, pp. 266-277.

VIII. Mill

Gide-Rist, Book III, Ch. 2

IX. Protectionist Views and the National Outlook

Gray, Ch. 8, pp. 227-238; Ch. 9, pp. 248-260.

X. Forerunners of Socialism (Simondi; the Ricardian Socialists)

Gide-Rist, Book II, Ch. 1

XI. French Pre-Marxian Socialists

Gide-Rist, Book II, Chs. 2, 3, and 5.

XII. Marxism

Gray, Ch. 11 and Roll’s chapter on Marx

XIII. The Historical School and Institutionalism

Gide-Rist, Book IV, Ch. 1

XIV. Early Expressions of the Welfare State Ideology

Gide-Rist, Book IX, Ch. 2, Ch. 4

XV. The Neo-classical School

Gray, Ch. 12

XVI. Neo-classical, Historical-Institutionalist and Socialist Influences on Contemporary Thought

______________________________________

1950-51
Economics 100
History of Economic Thought

List of Books and Articles

I. General

Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences (Edwin R. A. Seligman, Ed.: Alvin Johnson, Assoc. Ed.) [Vol. I; Vol. II ; Vol. III ; Vols.III & IV ; Vol. V ; Vols. VI & VI ; Vol. VII ; Vol. VIII ; Vol. IX ; Vol. X ; Vol. XI ; Vols. XI & XII ; Vol. XIII ; Vols. XIII & XIV ; Vol. XV .
Gide, Charles and Rist, Charles, History of Economic Doctrines
Gray, Alexander, The Development of Economic Doctrine
Haney, Lewis H., History of Economic Thought
Roll, Eric, A History of Economic Thought
Whittaker, Edmund, History of Economic Ideas [Schools and Streams of Economic Thought (1960)]
Schumpeter, Joseph, Epochen der Dogmengeschichte [1954 English translation]

II. On Problems of Methodology

Schumpeter, Joseph, Science and Ideology, American Economic Review, March 1949
Keynes, John Neville, Scope and Method of Political Economy
Robbins, Lionel, Essay on the Nature and Significance of Economic Science
Hutcheson, T. W., Significance and Basic Postulates of Economic Theory
Boehm-Bawerk, E. v., The Historical vs. the Deductive Method in Political Economy. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 1890
Cairnes, J. E., The Character and Logical Method of Political Economy
Senior, Nassau W., Four Introductory Lectures on Political Economy
Sidgwick, Henry, Scope and Method of Economic Science
Bagehot, Walter, Economic Studies
Myrdal, Gunnar, Das politische Element in der nationaloekonomischen [Doktrinbildung]

II. On Specific Topics

O’Brien, G., An Essay on Mediaeval Economic Teaching
Laistner, M. L. W., Greek Economics
Tawney, R. H., Religion and the Rise of Capitalism
Boehm-Bawerk, E. v., Capital and Interest
Heckscher, Eli F., Mercantilism [Volume I; Volume II]
Horrocks, J. W., A Short History of Mercantilism
Hull, Charles H., Petty’s Place in Economic Theory, Q. J. E., 1900
Monroe, A. E., Monetary Theory before Adam Smith
Johnson, E. A. J., Predecessors of Adam Smith
Schmoller, Gustav, The Mercantile System and Its Historical Significance
Angell, James W., The Theory of International Prices
Viner, Jacob, Studies in the Theory of International Trade
Higgs, H., The Physiocrats
Oncken, August, Geschichte der Nationaloekonomie (on the Physiocrats)
Spengler, J. J., The Physiocrats and Say’s Law of Markets, Journal of Political Economy, September and December, 1945.
Rae, John, The Life of Adam Smith
Bonar, James, Malthus and his Work
Bowley, Marian, Nassau Senior and Classical Economics
Viner, Jacob, Bentham and Mill, American Economic Review, March 1949
Knight, F. H., The Ricardian Theory of Production and Distribution (Canadian Journal of Economics, 1935)
Williams, John H. The Theory of International Trade Reconsidered (Economic Journal, 1929)
Dicey, A. V., Law and Public Opinion in England
Cannan, Edwin, Theories of Production and Distribution
Stephen, Leslie, The English Utilitarians [Vol I Jeremy Bentham; Vol II James Mill; Vol III John Stuart Mill]
Halevy, Elie, The Growth of Philosophic Radicalism
Schumpeter, Joseph, The Communist Manifesto in Sociology and Economics, Journal of Political Economy, June 1949
Kautsky, Karl, The Economic Doctrine of Karl Marx [German original]
Carr, E. H., Karl Marx: A Study in Fanaticism
Mehring, Franz, Karl Marx
Keynes, J. M., Essays in Biography (Alfred Marshall)
Boehm-Bawerk, E. v., Karl Marx and the Close of His System
Schumpeter, Joseph A., Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy
Gray, Alexander, The Socialist Tradition
Sweezy, Paul, The Theory of Capitalist Development
Croce, Benedetto, Historical Materialism
Stigler, George J., Theories of Production and Distribution
Schumpeter, Joseph, Vilfredo Pareto, Q.J.E., May 1949
Mulcahy, Richard E., The Welfare Economics of Heinrich Pesch, Q.J.E., August, 1949

IV. Some Important Works in the History of Economic Thought

St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica
Monroe, A. E., Early Economic Thought
Petty, Economic Writings of Sir William Petty, edited by Charles Henry Hull
King, Two Tracts of Gregory King, edited by George E. Barnett
Steuart, Sir James, Principles of Political Economy
Quesnay, François, Oeuvres Économiques et Philosophiques
Hume, David, Political Discourses
Smith, Adam, The Theory of Moral Sentiments
Malthus, T. R., Essay on Population (7th ed.) [eighth edition]
Malthus, T. R., Parallel chapters from the first and second edition of the “Essay” (edited by W. J. Ashley)
Malthus, T. R., Principles of Political Economy
Ricardo, David, Political Works (Ed. J. R. McCulloch, with a short biography by idem)
Ricardo, David, Principles of Political Economy
Ricardo, David, Letters of David Ricardo to the Rev. T. R. Malthus
Say, Jean Baptiste, Traité d’Économie Politique [2nd ed. 1814]
Say, Letters of J. B. Say to the Rev. T. R. Malthus
Sismondi, S. de, Nouveaux Principes d’Économie Politique
Senior, Nassau William, Outline of Political Economy
Carey, Henry Charles, Principles of Political Economy
List, Friedrich, Das Nationale System der politischen Oekonomie [German; 1909 English translation]
Cournot, Augustin, Researches into the Mathematical Principles of the Theory of Wealth (N. Bacon, translator)
von Thuenen, Heinrich, Der Isolierte Staat
Mill, John Stuart, Principles of Political Economy
Mill, John Stuart, Autobiography
Smith, Adam, An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations
Cairnes, J. E., Some Leading Principles of Political Economy
Mill, John Stuart, Dissertations and Discussions [Vol. I ; Vol. II ; Vol. III ; Vol. IV]
Marx, Karl, Capital
Marx, Karl, Capital and other works (Selections)
Marx and Engels, The Correspondence of Marx and Engels, 1846-95 (collected by the Marx-Lenin Institute)
Marx and Engels, Manifesto of the Communist Party
Hilferding, Rudolf, Das Finanzkapital
Luxemburg, Rosa, Die Akkumulation des Kapitals
Lenin (Vladimir Ulianov), Imperialism; The State and the Revolution
Gossen, Hermann Heinrich, Entwicklung der Gesetze des menschlichen Verkehrs
Jevons, W. S., The Theory of Political Economy (2nd or later edition)
Menger, Carl, Grundsaetze der Volkswirtschaftslehre
Walras, Leon, Élements d’Économie Politique Pure
Pareto, Vilfredo, Manuel d’Économie Politique
Pareto, Vilfredo, The Mind and Society (A. Livingston, Ed.) [Vol. I & Vol. II ; Vols. III & IV]
Boehm-Bawerk, E. v., Capital and Interest; and The Positive Theory of Capital
Wieser, F. v., Natural Value
Marshall, Alfred, Principles of Economics
Marshall, Alfred, Money, Credit and Commerce
Marshall, Alfred, Official Papers
Wicksteed, Philip, Commonsense of Political Economy
Wicksteed, Philip, The Coordination of the Laws of Distribution
Wicksell, Knut, Lectures on Political Economy [Vol. I ; Vol. II], [German translation 1913]
George, Henry, Poverty and Progress
Walker, Francis A., The Wages Question
Clark, J. B., The Distribution of Wealth
Clark, J. B., Essentials of Economic Theory
Fisher, Irving, The Purchasing Power of Money
Fisher, Irving, The Theory of Interest
Davenport, H. J., The Economics of Enterprise
Davenport, H. J., Value and Distribution
Veblen, Thorstein, The Theory of Business Enterprise
Veblen, Thorstein, The Place of Science in Civilization
Commons, John R., Institutional Economics
Schmoller, Gustav, Grundriss der allgemeinen Volkswirtschaftslehre [Erster Teil (1908); Zweiter Teil (1904)]
Wagner, Adolf, Grundlegung der Politischen Oekonomie [Vol. I, part 1. 1892, 3ed. ; (Vol 1, part 2. 1894 3ed]
Weber, Max, Theory of Social and Economic Organization
Rerum Novarum (Papal encyclical of May 15, 1891, Leo XIII)
Quadragesimo Anno (Papal encyclical of May 15, 1931, Pius XI)

 

Source: Harvard University Archives. Syllabi, course outlines and reading lists in Economics, 1895-2003 (HUC 8522.2.1), Box 5, Folder “Economics, 1950-1951, (1 of 2)”.

Image Source: AEA portrait of William Fellner, Number 71 of a series of photographs of past presidents of the Association, in American Economic Review, Vol. 60, No. 1 (1970).