Why Economics is an Evolutionary, Mathematical Science: How Could Veblen’s View Of Economics Been So Different Than C. S. Peirce’s?

James Wible and Jhet Assistant

No 5nwsa, OSF Preprints from Center for Open Science

Abstract: More than a century ago one of the most famous essays ever written in American economics appeared in the Quarterly Journal of Economics, “Why is Economics Not an Evolutionary Science?” There Thorstein Veblen claimed that economics was too dominated by a mechanistic view to address the problems of economic life. Since the world and the economy had come to be viewed from an evolutionary perspective after Darwin, it was rather straight forward to argue that the increasingly abstract mathematical character of economics was non-evolutionary. However, Veblen had studied with a first-rate intellect, Charles Sanders Peirce, attending his elementary logic class. If Peirce had written about the future of economics in 1898, it would have been very different than Veblen’s essay. Peirce could have written that economics should become an evolutionary mathematical science and that much of classical and neoclassical economics could be interpreted from an evolutionary perspective.

Date: 2020-09-29
New Economics Papers: this item is included in nep-evo, nep-his, nep-hme, nep-hpe and nep-pke
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://osf.io/download/5f73439c46080904001af14c/

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:osf:osfxxx:5nwsa

DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/5nwsa

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in OSF Preprints from Center for Open Science
Bibliographic data for series maintained by OSF ().