Abstract
Chapter 1 pointed to the mid-seventeenth century as the beginning of scientific economics. This emerging scientific approach had many facets — one of which was the attempt by writers to increase the generality of propositions.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
This is discussed widely in the literature. See J. J. Spengler, ‘Adam Smith’s Theory of Economic Growth’, Part i, Southern Economic Journal, xxv (1959) 397–415.Part ti, xxvi(1959) 1–12; and R. Kroebner, ‘Adam Smith and the Industrial Revolution’, Economic History Review, Second Series, xi (1959) 381-91
See W. H. B. Court, A Concise Economic History of Britain from 1750 to Recent Times ( Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1954 ) 84.; and E. F. Heckscher, Mercantilism, Translated by M. Shapiro, 2nd ed. (London: Allen and Unwin, 1955) vol. I, 415.
See N. Rosenberg, ‘Some Institutional Aspects of the Wealth of Nations’, Journal of Political Economy, LXVIII (1960) 557–70.
Compare with the claim of J. A. Schumpeter, History of Economic Analysis ( London: Allen and Unwin, 1954 ) 555.
For a clear account of the history of the concept of the entrepreneur see B. F. Hoselitz in J. J. Spengler and W. R. Allen (eds.), Essays in Economic Thought: Aristotle to Marshall ( Chicago: Rand McNally, 1960 ).
See R. L. Meek, The Economics of Physiocracy. Essays and Translations ( London: Allen and Unwin, 1962 ) 387.
These words are used interchangeably. See P. D. Groenewegen, ‘A Reinterpretation of Turgot’s Theory of Capital and Interest’, Economic Journal, 81 (1971) 155.
But von Mangoldt had made the observation in 1855. See H. K. E. von Mangoldt in F. M. Taylor (ed.), Some Readings in Economics ( Ann Arbor: George Wahr, 1907 )39. Von Mangoldt claims that the ownership of capital is not a necessary condition for entrepreneurship, ‘ … if his personal characteristics have given him credit enough to place at his disposal the necessary funds of other persons.’
See J. F. Weston, ‘The Profit Concept and Theory: A Restatement’, Journal of Political Economy, lvii (1954) 152–70.
F. H. Knight, Risk Uncertainty and Profit, 1st ed. 1921 (London: L. S. E. Reprint, 1933 ) 308–9.
R. Cantillon, Essai Sur La Nature Du Commerce En Général, Translated from the French ed. of 1775 by H. Higgs (London: Macmillan, For the Royal Economic Society, 1931 ) 49.
A. E. Munroe (ed.), Early Economic Thought ( Camridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1924 ) 54.
N. Barbon, A Discourse of Trade (London: 1690 ).For detailed references to the pamphlet literature on profit-maximisation see J. Viner, Studies in the Theory of International Trade (London: Allen and Unwin, 1937) 91 ff.
A. A. Young, ‘Increasing Returns and Economic Progress’, Economic Journal, xxxviii (1928) 529.
T. S. Ashton, An Economic History of England: The Eighteenth Century ( London: Methuen, 1955 ) 103.
G. J. Stigler, ‘The Division of Labor is Limited by the Extent of the Market’, The Organization of Industry (Homewood, Illinois: Irwin, 1968 ) 129–41.
H. Spencer, The Principles of Sociology (London: Williams and Norgate, 1894) vol. iii, 345–403.
B. Webb. My Apprenticeship, 1st ed. 1926. (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1971 ) 48.
For a review of the early developments in this theory, see H. W. Arndt, ‘External Economies in Economic Growth’, Economic Record, xxxi(1955) 192–214.
See M. Blaug, ‘Welfare Indices in the Wealth of Nations’, Southern Economic Journal, xxvi (1959) 150–3.
For a review of the work of Boisguilbert see H. Van D. Roberts, Boisguilbert, Economist of the Reign of Louis XIV ( New York: Columbia University Press, 1935 ).
For a further explanation of these concepts see P. A. Samuelson, Foundations of Economic Analysis ( Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1947 ).
A. R. J. Turgot, Turgot on Progress, Sociology and Economics, translations by R. L. Meek (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1973) 152 .
For detailed citations of the role of utility and demand in The Wealth of Nations see S. Hollander in A. S. Skinner and T. Wilson (eds.), Essays on Adam Smith ( Oxford: Clarendon, 1975 ).
J. Harris, An Essay upon Money and Coins (London: 1757 )9, his emphasis.
Quoted in G. S. L. Tucker, Progress and Profits in British Economic Thought 1650–1850 ( Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1960 ).69
J. R. Hicks, Value and Capital, 2nd ed. ( Oxford: Clarendon, 1946 ).
R. de Roover, ‘Monopoly Theory Prior to Adam Smith’, Quarterly Journal of Economics, Lxv (1951) 492–524.
E. Cannan, A Review of Economic Theory ( London: King, 1929 ) 225.
Copyright information
© 1978 Philip L. Williams
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Williams, P.L. (1978). Adam Smith. In: The Emergence of the Theory of the Firm. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-03789-6_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-03789-6_2
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-03791-9
Online ISBN: 978-1-349-03789-6
eBook Packages: Palgrave Economics & Finance CollectionEconomics and Finance (R0)