IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/osf/osfxxx/aq2bz_v1.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Marginalism and Scope in the Early Methodenstreit

Author

Listed:
  • Klooster, Jens van 't

Abstract

Recent interpretations of the early Methodenstreit (1871 – 1883) between Gustav Schmoller and Carl Menger no longer identify a substantial point of controversy. I reconstruct the debate to show that the pivotal topic was the scope of economics. Menger claims that his Principles of Economics more or less capture the full scope of the discipline, which Schmoller denies. I also discuss recent Menger scholarship, which follows Friedrich Hayek in situating Menger at the edges or even outside the marginalist mainstream. I argue that this interpretation wrongly denies Menger his pioneer status as, possibly the first, marginalist.

Suggested Citation

  • Klooster, Jens van 't, 2020. "Marginalism and Scope in the Early Methodenstreit," OSF Preprints aq2bz_v1, Center for Open Science.
    • Handle: RePEc:osf:osfxxx:aq2bz_v1
    DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/aq2bz_v1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://osf.io/download/5f7344b368d85003918a91d6/
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.31219/osf.io/aq2bz_v1?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
    ---><---

    More about this item

    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:aq2bz_v1. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.