Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T08:53:07.320Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

WILLIAM NASSAU SENIOR AND DAVID RICARDO ON THE METHOD OF POLITICAL ECONOMY

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 January 2013

CHRISTOPHE DEPOORTÈRE
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper reconsiders the supposed agreement of David Ricardo and William Nassau Senior on the question of the method of political economy. The first part shows that Senior was very critical about Ricardo’s approach to economic phenomena and considered that this question of method had important consequences on theoretical points. The second part analyzes the way Ricardo was dealing with economics. It shows that though Senior was right in considering that their respective methods were different and led to important analytical divergences, he nevertheless misunderstood Ricardo’s method with a hypothetico-deductive one. The consequence is that Senior’s criticisms on Ricardo’s theories of rent, natural wages, and of the tendencies of agricultural returns to decrease and of profit to fall are ill-founded, being based on a misunderstanding of the way they were established.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of the History of Economic Thought , Volume 35 , Issue 1 , March 2013 , pp. 19 - 42
Copyright
Copyright © The History of Economics Society 2013

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

Arena, R. 1992. “La pensée économique post-ricardienne avant John Stuart Mill.” In Beraud, A. and Faccarello, G., eds., Nouvelle histoire de la pensée économique. Tome 1: Des scolastiques aux classiques. Paris: La Découverte.Google Scholar
Blaug, M. 1956. “The Empirical Content of Ricardian Economics.” Journal of Political Economy 64: 41–58. As reprinted in J.C. Wood, ed. 1985. David Ricardo Critical Assessments. First series. Four volumes. London: Routledge, vol. I, pp. 157–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blaug, M. 1992. The Methodology of Economics or How Economists Explain. Second edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bowley, M. 1936. “Nassau Senior’s Contribution to the Methodology of Economics.” Economica 3: 281–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bowley, M. 1937. Nassau Senior and Classical Economists. London: G. Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
Brennan, H.G., and Waterman, A.M.C.. 1994. Economics and Religion: Are They Distinct? Boston, Dordrecht, and London: Kluwer Academic Publisher.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caravale, G.A., ed. 1985. The Legacy of Ricardo. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Coleman, W.O. 1996. “How Theory Came to English Classical Economics.” Scottish Journal of Political Economy 43: 207–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Collini, S., Winch, D., and Burrow, J., eds. 1983. That Noble Science of Politics: A Study in Nineteenth-Century Intellectual History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Corsi, P. 1987. “The Heritage of Dugald Stewart: Oxford Philosophy and the Method of Political Economy, 1809–1832.” Nuncius, Annali di Storia della Scienza 2: 89–144.Google Scholar
Corsi, P. 1988. Science and Religion. Baden Powell and the Anglican Debate, 1800–1860. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cozzi, T., and Marchionatti, R., eds. 2001. Piero Sraffa’s Political Economy. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Davis, J.B. 1998. “Ricardo, David.” In Hands, D.W. and Mäki, U., eds., The Handbook of Economic Methodology. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, pp. 422–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Marchi, N.B. 1970. “The Empirical Content and Longevity of Ricardian Economics.” Economica 37: 257–276. As reprinted in J.C. Wood, ed. 1985. David Ricardo Critical Assessments. First series. Four volumes. London: Routledge, vol. I, pp. 215–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Marchi, N.B. 1987. “ Nassau Senior.” In Eatwell, J., Milgate, M. and Newman, P., eds., The New Palgrave Dictionary. Four volumes. London: Macmillan, vol. IV, pp. 303–305.Google Scholar
Depoortère, C. 2008a. “On Ricardo’s Method: The Scottish Connection Considered.” History of Political Economy 40: 73–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Depoortère, C. 2008b. “Quel modèle d’accumulation du capital chez Ricardo?” Cahiers d’Economie Politique 55: 141–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dixon, W. 2008. “Ricardo: Economic Thought and Social Order.” Journal of the History of Economic Thought 30: 235–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eatwell, J. 1977. “The Irrelevance of Returns to Scale in Sraffa’s Analysis.” Journal of Economic Literature 15: 61–68.Google Scholar
Garegnani, P. 1983. “The Classical Theory of Wages and the Role of Demand Schedules in the Determination of Relative Prices.” American Economic Review 73: 309–313.Google Scholar
Garegnani, P. 1984. “Value and Distribution in the Classical Economists and Marx.” Oxford Economic Papers 36: 291–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gootzeit, M.J. 1975. David Ricardo. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Hollander, S. 1979. The Economics of David Ricardo. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
Hollander, S. 1983. “On the Interpretation of Ricardian Economics: The Assumption Regarding Wages.” As reprinted in S. Hollander. 1995, Ricardo—The New View. London: Routledge, pp. 219–225.Google Scholar
Hollander, S. 1995. Ricardo—The New View. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Horner, F. 1957. The Economic Writings of Francis Horner in the Edinburgh Review 1802–6, edited by Fetter, F.W.. New York: Kelley and Millman.Google Scholar
Houghton, W.E. 1966–89. The Wellesley Index to Victorian Periodicals 1824–1900. Five volumes. London: Routledge and P. Kegan.Google Scholar
Hutchison, T. 1994. The Uses and Abuses of Economics: Contentious Essays on History and Method. London and New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hutchison, T. 1998. “Ultra-Deductivism from Nassau Senior to Lionel Robbins and Daniel Hausman.” Journal of Economic Methodology 5: 43–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Karayiannis, A.D. 2001. “Behavioural Assumptions in Nassau Senior’s Economics.” Contributions to Political Economy 20: 17–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levy, S.L. 1970. Nassau W. Senior 1790–1864. Newton Abbot: David & Charles.Google Scholar
Maas, H. 2005. William Stanley Jevons and the Making of Modern Economics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Maas, H., and Morgan, M.S.. 2002. “Timing History: The Introduction of Graphical Analysis in the 19th Century British Economics.” Revue d’Histoire des Sciences Humaines 7: 97–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Malthus, T.R. 1820. Principles of Political Economy Considered with a View to Their Practical Application. First edition. London: J. Murray.Google Scholar
Marcuzzo, M.C., and Rosselli, A.. 1994. “Ricardo’s Theory of Money Matters.” Revue Economique 45: 1251–1267.Google Scholar
Marx, K. 1966. Capital. Volume III. London: Lawrence & Wishart.Google Scholar
McCulloch, J.R. 1824. A Discourse on the Rise, Progress, Peculiar Objects and Importance of Political Economy. Edinburgh: Constable and Co.Google Scholar
McKerrow, R.E. 1981. “Richard Whately on the Nature of Human Knowledge in Relation to Ideas of His Contemporaries.” Journal of the History of Ideas 42: 439–455.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Merivale, H. 1837. “An Outline of the Science of Political Economy by Nassau W. Senior, Esq.” The Edinburgh Review 66: 293–339.Google Scholar
Mill, J. 1813. “Grant’s Expediency of Continuing the Indian System.” Monthly Review 70: 410–425.Google Scholar
O’Brien, D.P. 1975. The Classical Economists. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
O’Brien, D.P. 1981. “Ricardian Economics and the Economics of David Ricardo.” Oxford Economic Papers 33: 352–386. As reprinted in J.C. Wood, ed. 1994. David Ricardo Critical Assessments. Second series. Three volumes. London: Routledge, vol. V, pp. 159–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peach, T. 1993. Interpreting Ricardo. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rashid, S. 1977. “Richard Whately and Christian Political Economy at Oxford and Dublin.” Journal of the History of Ideas 38: 147–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rashid, S. 1985. “Dugald Stewart, ‘Baconian’ Methodology, and Political Economy.” Journal of the History of Ideas 46: 245–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reid, T. 1863. The Works of Thomas Reid, edited by Hamilton, W.. Two volumes. Edinburgh: MacLachlan and Stewart.Google Scholar
Ricardo, D. 1819. Des principes de l’économie politique et de l’impôt. Two volumes. Paris: J.P.Aillaud.Google Scholar
Ricardo, D. 1951–73. The Works and Correspondence of David Ricardo, edited by Sraffa, P. with the collaboration of M. H. Dobb. Eleven volumes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Roncaglia, A. 2001. “ Production of Commodities by Means of Commodities between Criticism and Reconstruction: The Given Quantities Assumption. In Cozzi, T. and Marchionatti, R., eds., Piero Sraffa’s Political Economy. London and New York: Routledge, pp. 207–221.Google Scholar
Rosselli, A. 1985. “The Theory of the Natural Wage.” In Caravale, G.A., ed., The Legacy of Ricardo. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, pp. 239–254.Google Scholar
Rutherford, D. 1998. “Introduction.” In Senior, W.N., Collected Works of Nassau William Senior, edited by Rutherford, D.. Six volumes. Bristol: Thoemmes Press, vol. I, pp. vii–xxx.Google Scholar
Say, J.B. 1803. Traité d’économie politique ou simple exposition de la manière dont se forment, se distribuent, et se consomment les richesses. First edition. Two volumes. Paris: Crapelet.Google Scholar
Schumpeter, J.A. 1954. History of Economic Analysis. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Senior, W.N. [1827] 1998. “An Introductory Lecture on Political Economy.” In Senior, W.N.. Collected Works of Nassau William Senior, edited by Rutherford, D.. Six volumes. Bristol: Thoemmes Press, vol. I.Google Scholar
Senior, W.N. [1836] 1998. “An Outline of the Science of Political Economy.” In Senior, W.N., Collected Works of Nassau William Senior, edited by Rutherford, D.. Six volumes. Bristol: Thoemmes Press, vol. I.Google Scholar
Senior, W.N. 1848. “J. S. Mill on Political Economy.” The Edinburgh Review 88: 293–339. In W.N. Senior, Collected Works of Nassau William Senior, edited by D. Rutherford. Six volumes. Bristol: Thoemmes Press, 1998, vol. I.Google Scholar
Senior, W.N. [1852] 1998. “Four Introductory Lectures on Political Economy.” In Senior, W.N., Collected Works of Nassau William Senior, edited by Rutherford, D.. Six volumes. Bristol: Thoemmes Press, vol. I.Google Scholar
Senior, W.N. 1998. Collected Works of Nassau William Senior, edited by Rutherford, D.. Six volumes. Bristol: Thoemmes Press.Google Scholar
Sraffa, P. 1960. Production of Commodities by Means of Commodities. Prelude to a Critique of Economic Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Stewart, D. 1854–60. The Collected Works of Dugald Stewart, edited by Hamilton, W.. Eleven volumes. Edinburgh: T. Constable and Co.Google Scholar
Swift, J. 1814. Works of Jonathan Swift. Volume XII. Constable: Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Tucker, G.S.L. 1960. Progress and Profits in British Economic Thought: 1650–1850. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Waterman, A. M. C. 1991. Revolution, Economics and Religion. Christian Political Economy, 1798-1833. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waterman, A. M. C. 1994. “Whately, Senior, and the Methodology of Classical Economists.” In Brennan, H.G. and Waterman, A.M.C., Economics and Religion: Are They Distinct? Boston, Dordrecht, and London: Kluwer Academic Publisher, pp. 41–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whately, R. 1832. Introductory Lectures on Political Economy. Second edition. London: B. Fellowes.Google Scholar
Wood, J.C., ed. 1985. David Ricardo Critical Assessments. First series. Four volumes. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Wood, J.C., ed. 1994. David Ricardo Critical Assessments. Second series. Three volumes. London: Routledge.Google Scholar