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] (Steve Cullenberg)
Date:
Fri Mar 31 17:18:33 2006
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (24 lines)
================= HES POSTING ======================= 
 
[This message was originally sent to HES in December, following the  
postings on this topic. There were technical problems at Eh.Net that day,  
and I forgot to post the message later. So here it is, about a month late.  
Mea cupla! The archived response to this thread by Jonathon Glickstein  
does answer this inquiry, in part. -- RBE] 
 
I want to thank Ross and David Levy for this very interesting and 
surprising, to me at least, response. 
 
Can I ask some of the obvious next questions:  when did the phrase, the 
"dismal science" get connected to Malthus, or did it?  Is this a latter day 
invention?  Did Carlyle ever link the "dismal science" to Malthus in 
another context than the "black science"?  And, when did it become common 
to refer to economics as the dismal science in reference to the Malthusian 
population principle? 
 
Steve 
 
============ FOOTER TO HES POSTING ============ 
For information, send the message "info HES" to [log in to unmask] 
 

ATOM RSS1 RSS2