Date: |
Fri Mar 31 17:18:58 2006 |
Message-ID: |
|
Subject: |
|
From: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Hello All
A few thoughts regarding the thread on the relationship between the
history of economics and the history of economic thought. There is an
interesting recent book which address (in its introduction) the problems
with the growing disjuncture between these two fields -- Jean-Claude
Perrot, Une Histoire Intellectuelle de l'Economie Politique (XVIIe-XVIIIe
siecle (Paris: E.H.E.S.S, 1992).
As for a few of my own thoughts (and as someone coming to the question who
is trained in cultural history), I find the separation disconcerting. The
analogies made to the history of science are instructive, for the most
interesting and illuminating studies in the history of the
Scientific Revolution in the last 20 years have sought to break away from
the traditional Copernicus-Galileo-Descartes-Newton story line. Instead
the history of science has been contextualized within a much broader
story about the changing attitudes toward the natural world. It
strikes me that one strength for the history of economic thought would be
keeping a storyline closely connected to the history of economic
development -- a linking together of the history of thought and practice.
This would necessitate re-considering how to investigate economic thought
in a less narrow context -- less Smith-Ricardo and more merchants and
manufacturers (For two interesting examples, I'd suggest Jean-Pierre Hirsch,
Les Deux Reves du Commerce: Entreprise et institution dans la region
lilloise (1780-1860) or William Reddy, The Rise of Market Culture: The
Textile Trade and French Society, 1750-1900).
David K. Smith
[log in to unmask]
|
|
|