Dear all,

Considering the explanations of both Nicholas and Ross,
does it mean that
the absolutist approach is on the decline after the 1970s?
Or it means  that the old terminology was just
thrown away?

All the Best,

Yukihiro Ikeda

(2011/07/19 8:30), Nicholas Theocarakis wrote:
> Malcolm and Gavin are right. I have used as a rough and ready measure the
> bibliographical entries that have a publication year under "economic
> doctrine(s)" and "history of economic thought" in the Worldcat and created a
> graph. Until the 1970s there is no significant difference in the frequency
> of use of either term.  It seems, however, that after the 1970s, "history of
> economic thought" takes off at an exponential rate, while "economic
> doctrine(s)" is on the decline.
>
> On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 10:11 PM, gavin<[log in to unmask]>  wrote:
>
>> Malcolm
>>
>> And we have the excellent text by the celebrated (at least in Edinburgh by
>> generations of students) Professor Alexander Gray, 1931.  The Development of
>> Economic Doctrine. Longmans, Green and Co.  London.
>>
>> Gavin Kennedy
>> ________________________________________
>> From: Societies for the History of Economics [[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of
>> Malcolm Rutherford [[log in to unmask]]
>> Sent: 18 July 2011 20:26
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: Re: [SHOE] Schumpeter's history
>>
>> Everyone should recall that the term “Economic Doctrines” used to be used
>> quite commonly to describe the history of economic thought.  In particular
>> T. W. Hutchison’s Review of Economic Doctrines 1953.
>>
>> Malcolm Rutherford.
>>
>