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:
[log in to unmask]" type="cite">
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.