Joan Robinson and MIT

H. Gram, G. Harcourt
{"title":"Joan Robinson and MIT","authors":"H. Gram, G. Harcourt","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2843349","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Roger Backhouse begins his essay on “MIT and the Other Cambridge” (Backhouse, 2014; hereafter RB with page numbers only) citing Joan Robinson’s “challenge to what she chose to call the neoclassical theory of production” (RB, p. 252). His title referred, of course, to Robinson’s protagonists at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology; in particular, Paul Samuelson and Robert Solow. After developing his thesis that disequilibrium macroeconomics emerged as a by-product of the capital theory controversy, Backhouse concludes with the observation: “The controversy between the two Cambridges eventually came to be seen by MIT economists (and most of the economics profession) as a waste of time” (RB, p. 269).","PeriodicalId":23435,"journal":{"name":"UNSW Business School Research Paper Series","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"UNSW Business School Research Paper Series","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2843349","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

Roger Backhouse begins his essay on “MIT and the Other Cambridge” (Backhouse, 2014; hereafter RB with page numbers only) citing Joan Robinson’s “challenge to what she chose to call the neoclassical theory of production” (RB, p. 252). His title referred, of course, to Robinson’s protagonists at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology; in particular, Paul Samuelson and Robert Solow. After developing his thesis that disequilibrium macroeconomics emerged as a by-product of the capital theory controversy, Backhouse concludes with the observation: “The controversy between the two Cambridges eventually came to be seen by MIT economists (and most of the economics profession) as a waste of time” (RB, p. 269).
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
琼·罗宾逊与
罗杰·巴恪思开始了他的论文“麻省理工学院和另一个剑桥”(巴恪思,2014;引用琼·罗宾逊“对她所谓的新古典主义生产理论的挑战”(RB,第252页)。当然,他的书名指的是鲁滨逊在麻省理工学院的主角们;特别是保罗·萨缪尔森和罗伯特·索洛。在发展了他的论文,即非均衡宏观经济学是资本理论争论的副产品之后,巴克斯豪斯总结道:“两个剑桥之间的争论最终被麻省理工学院的经济学家(以及大多数经济学专业人士)视为浪费时间”(RB,第269页)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Women in Accounting: A Historical Review of Obstacles and Drivers on a Patriarchal and Classist Path A Practical Guide to Weak Instruments Nature of Anti-Competitive Agreement Law in India: A Brief Review The Effect of Investor Credit Supply on Housing Prices Emerging Market & Mobile Technology Usage: Evaluating intention to use Mobile Banking in India
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1