IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/osf/osfxxx/95jek.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Understanding Clarence Ayres’s criticism to an emerging mainstream and birthing institutionalism through the 1930s Ayres-Knight debate

Author

Listed:
  • Almeida, Felipe
  • Cavalieri, Marco

Abstract

Clarence Ayres was a strong dissenting voice in US economics during the 20th century. In the 1930s, a debate between Ayres and Frank Knight was published by the International Journal of Ethics. Although the debate focused on ethics, the evolution of economics was also discussed. This paper proposes an understanding of Ayres’s ideas based on the context in which he made them. This context is defined by the 1930s Ayres-Knight debate and the archival correspondence between Ayres and Knight during the 1930s.

Suggested Citation

  • Almeida, Felipe & Cavalieri, Marco, 2020. "Understanding Clarence Ayres’s criticism to an emerging mainstream and birthing institutionalism through the 1930s Ayres-Knight debate," OSF Preprints 95jek, Center for Open Science.
    • Handle: RePEc:osf:osfxxx:95jek
    DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/95jek
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://osf.io/download/603d799467386c02c861b578/
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.31219/osf.io/95jek?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Avi J. Cohen, 2014. "Veblen Contra Clark and Fisher: Veblen-Robinson-Harcourt lineagesin capital controversies and beyond," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 38(6), pages 1493-1515.
    2. Malcolm Rutherford, 2001. "Walton Hamilton, Amherst, and the Brookings Graduate School: Institutonal Economics and Education," Department Discussion Papers 0104, Department of Economics, University of Victoria.
    3. Malcolm Rutherford, 1981. "Clarence Ayres and the Instrumental Theory of Value," Journal of Economic Issues, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(3), pages 657-673, September.
    4. Warren J. Samuels, 1992. "The Knight-Ayres Correspondence: The Grounds of Knowledge and Social Action," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Essays on the Methodology and Discourse of Economics, chapter 9, pages 154-200, Palgrave Macmillan.
    5. Clive Lawson, 2009. "Ayres, Technology and Technical Objects," Journal of Economic Issues, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(3), pages 641-660.
    6. Veblen, Thorstein, 1998. "Why Is Economics Not an Evolutionary Science?," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 22(4), pages 403-414, July.
    7. Luca Fiorito, 2012. "American institutionalism at Chicago: A documentary note," The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(5), pages 829-836, October.
    8. Charles R. McCann & Vibha Kapuria-Foreman, 2016. "Robert Franklin Hoxie: The Contributions of a Neglected Chicago Economist☆," Research in the History of Economic Thought and Methodology, in: Research in the History of Economic Thought and Methodology, volume 34, pages 219-304, Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
    9. Veblen, Thorstein, 1900. "The Preconceptions of Economic Science III," History of Economic Thought Articles, McMaster University Archive for the History of Economic Thought, vol. 14.
    10. Malcolm Rutherford, 1984. "Thorstein Veblen and the Processes of Institutional Change," History of Political Economy, Duke University Press, vol. 16(3), pages 331-348, Fall.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Nuno Ornelas Martins, 2014. "Process and Order in Classical and Marginalist Economics," Working Papers de Economia (Economics Working Papers) 06, Católica Porto Business School, Universidade Católica Portuguesa.
    2. Nuno Ornelas Martins, 2015. "Why is this ‘school’ called neoclassical economics? Classicism and neoclassicism in historical context," Working Papers de Economia (Economics Working Papers) 01, Católica Porto Business School, Universidade Católica Portuguesa.
    3. Ingrid Rima, 1996. "Can neoclassical economics be social economics?," Forum for Social Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(1), pages 5-13, January.
    4. Luigi Mittone & Gian Paolo Jesi, 2016. "Heuristic Driven Agents in Tax Evasion: an Agent-based Approach," CEEL Working Papers 1605, Cognitive and Experimental Economics Laboratory, Department of Economics, University of Trento, Italia.
    5. António Madureira & Nico Baken & Harry Bouwman, 2011. "Value of digital information networks: a holonic framework," Netnomics, Springer, vol. 12(1), pages 1-30, April.
    6. Blind, Georg, 2015. "Behavioural rules: Veblen, Nelson-Winter, Oström and beyond," MPRA Paper 66866, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Anastassios D. Karayiannis & Allan E. Young, 2003. "Entrepreneurial Activities in a Veblenian Type Transition Economy," The American Economist, Sage Publications, vol. 47(2), pages 40-51, October.
    8. Agnès Labrousse & Sandrine Michel, 2017. "Accumulation regimes," Post-Print hal-01719977, HAL.
    9. John Hall Author-Email: hallj@pdx.edu & Alexander Dunlap & Joe Mitchell-Nelson, 2016. "Subreption, Radical Institutionalism, and Economic Evolution," Panoeconomicus, Savez ekonomista Vojvodine, Novi Sad, Serbia, vol. 63(4), pages 475-492, September.
    10. Matson, Erik W., 2021. "Satisfaction in action: Hume's endogenous theory of preferences and the virtues of commerce," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 183(C), pages 849-860.
    11. Davanzati, Guglielmo Forges, 2018. "Structural change driven by institutions: Thorstein veblen revised," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 105-110.
    12. Philip Faulkner & Clive Lawson & Jochen Runde, 2010. "Theorising technology," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 34(1), pages 1-16, January.
    13. L. Carlsson & N.-G. Lundgren & M.-O. Olsson, 2000. "Why Is the Russian Bear Still Asleep After Ten Years of Transition?," Working Papers ir00019, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis.
    14. Hugh Rockoff, 2010. "On the Origins of A Monetary History," Chapters, in: Ross B. Emmett (ed.), The Elgar Companion to the Chicago School of Economics, chapter 7, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    15. K.Vela Velupillai, 2014. "One Hundred Years Ago - Economic Theory in 1914," ASSRU Discussion Papers 1408, ASSRU - Algorithmic Social Science Research Unit.
    16. David Colander & Richard Holt & Barkley Rosser, 2004. "The changing face of mainstream economics," Review of Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(4), pages 485-499.
    17. Nuno Ornelas Martins, 2021. "Adam Smith and Catholic Social Teaching," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 170(2), pages 401-411, May.
    18. Henning Schwardt, 2022. "Technology and social rules and norms in neo-Schumpeterian economics and in original institutional economics," PSL Quarterly Review, Economia civile, vol. 75(303), pages 385-401.
    19. Pierre Garrouste, 2008. "The Emergence and Evolution of Institutions: The Complementary Approaches of Carl Menger and Thorstein Veblen," ICER Working Papers 17-2008, ICER - International Centre for Economic Research.
    20. Malcolm Rutherford, 1987. "Wesley Mitchell: Institutions and Quantitative Methods," Eastern Economic Journal, Eastern Economic Association, vol. 13(1), pages 63-73, Jan-Mar.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:osf:osfxxx:95jek. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: OSF (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://osf.io/preprints/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.