Hostname: page-component-5cf477f64f-mgq6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-03-27T22:07:37.106Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Marcel Boumans and Matthias Klaes, eds., Mark Blaug: Rebel with Many Causes (Cheltenham, UK, and Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar, 2013), pp. ix + 302, $140. ISBN 978-1-78195-566-6.

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 November 2015

Neri Salvadori  and
Rodolfo Signorino
Neri Salvadori
Affiliation:
University of Pisa, Italy
Rodolfo Signorino
Affiliation:
University of Palermo, Italy
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Book Reviews
Information
Journal of the History of Economic Thought , Volume 37 , Issue 4 , December 2015 , pp. 615 - 623
Copyright
Copyright © The History of Economics Society 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Backhouse, Roger E. 2012. “Mark Blaug, 1927−2011.” History of Political Economy 44 (4): 567−582.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blaug, Mark. [1974] 1975. The Cambridge Revolution, Success or Failure? A Critical Analysis of Cambridge Theories of Value and Distribution. Second edition. London: Institute of Economic Affairs.Google Scholar
Blaug, Mark. [1962] 1985. Economic Theory in Retrospect. Fourth edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Blaug, Mark. 1990. “On the Historiography of Economics.” Journal of the History of Economic Thought 12 (1): 27−37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blaug, Mark. 1994. “Not Only an Economist—Autobiographical Reflections of a Historian of Economic Thought.” The American Economist 38 (2): 12−27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blaug, Mark. 1999. “Misunderstanding Classical Economics: The Sraffian Interpretation of the Surplus Approach.” History of Political Economy 31 (2): 213–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blaug, Mark. 2000. “Henry George: Rebel with a Cause.” The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought 7 (2): 270−288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blaug, Mark. 2001. “No History of Ideas, Please, We’re Economists.” Journal of Economic Perspectives 15 (1): 145−164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blaug, Mark. 2002a. “Kurz and Salvadori on the Sraffian Interpretation of the Surplus Approach.” History of Political Economy 34 (1): 237−240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blaug, Mark. 2002b. “Is There Really Progress in Economics?” In Boehm, Stephan, Gehrke, Christian, Kurz, Heinz D., and Sturn, Richard, eds., Is There Progress in Economics? Knowledge, Truth and the History of Economic Thought. Cheltenham, UK, and Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar, pp. 21−41.Google Scholar
Blaug, Mark. 2002c. “Ugly Currents in Modern Economics.” In Mäki, Uskali, ed., Fact and Fiction in Economics: Models, Realism, and Social Construction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 35−56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blaug, Mark. 2003a. “Rational vs Historical Reconstruction: A Counter-note on Signorino’s Note on Blaug.” The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought 10 (4): 607–608.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blaug, Mark. 2003b. “The Formalist Revolution of the 1950s.” Journal of the History of Economic Thought 25 (2): 145–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blaug, Mark. 2009. “The Trade-off between Rigor and Relevance: Sraffian Economics as a Case in Point.” History of Political Economy 41 (2): 219−247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hicks, John R. [1976] 1983. “‘Revolutions’ in Economics.” In Classics and Moderns, volume III of Collected Essays in Economic Theory. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, pp. 3–16.Google Scholar
Kurz, Heinz D., and Salvadori, Neri. 1993. “The ‘Standard Commodity’ and Ricardo’s Search for an ‘Invariable Measure of Value.’” In Baranzini, Mauro and Harcourt, Geoffrey C., eds, The Dynamics of the Wealth of Nations. Growth, Distribution and Structural Change. London: Macmillan, pp. 95–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kurz, Heinz D., and Salvadori, Neri. 2000. “Sraffa and the Mathematicians: Frank Ramsey and Alister Watson.” In Cozzi, Terenzio and Marchionatti, Roberto, eds. Piero Sraffa’s Political Economy. A Centenary Estimate. London and New York: Routledge, pp. 254–284.Google Scholar
Kurz, Heinz D., and Salvadori, Neri. 2002. “Mark Blaug on the ‘Sraffian Interpretation of the Surplus Approach.’” History of Political Economy 34 (1): 225−236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kurz, Heinz D., and Salvadori, Neri. 2011. “In Favor of Rigor and Relevance: A Reply to Mark Blaug.” History of Political Economy 43 (2): 607−616.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayr, E. 1990. “When Is Historiography Whiggish?” Journal of the History of Ideas 51 (2): 301−309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Samuelson, Paul A. 1974. “Rejoinder: Merlin Unclothed, a Final Word.” Journal of Economic Literature 12 (1): 75−77.Google Scholar
Signorino, Rodolfo. 2003a. “Rational vs Historical Reconstructions. A Note on Blaug.” The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought 10 (2): 329–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Signorino, Rodolfo. 2003b. “A Rejoinder.” The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought 10 (4): 609–610.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steedman, Ian. (1995). “Sraffian Economics and the Capital Controversy>” In Moseley, Fred, ed., Heterodox Economic Theories: True or False? Aldershot: Edward Elgar, pp. 1–45.Google Scholar
Stigler, George J. 1969. “Does Economics Have a Useful Past?” History of Political Economy 1 (2): 217−230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar