SHOE Archives

Societies for the History of Economics

SHOE@YORKU.CA

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
[log in to unmask] (Michael Williams)
Date:
Fri Mar 31 17:19:09 2006
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (25 lines)
=================== HES POSTING ==================== 
 
[I thought somebody on HES might be able to help Fred B. Moseley 
<[log in to unmask]> with this? -- Michael Williams. Postings to the  
list in reply to this message will be passed on to Fred, and will be  
circulated to the list as well. -- RBE] 
 
Does anyone know the origin of the term "neo-classical" economics?   
A student in my History of Economic Thought class asked me last week: 
"if the two theories are so different (classical and neo-classical), why 
is the later one called 'neo-classical'?  Why isn't it called something 
completely different.  It is an interesting question and I 
can't remember where the term originated.  Can anybody help me? 
 
Thanks in advance. 
 
Fred Moseley 
 
Dr Michael Williams  
Department of Economics 
School of Social Sciences 
De Montfort University 
============ FOOTER TO HES POSTING ============ 
For information, send the message "info HES" to [log in to unmask] 

ATOM RSS1 RSS2