Carlyle and Boulding: The Two Economists Largely Responsible for Their Discipline Becoming Known as ‘The Dismal Science’

Michael Schneider

History of Economics Review, 2018, vol. 70, issue 1, 40-48

Abstract: This article disproves the common contention that Thomas Carlyle dubbed economics ‘the dismal science’ in response to the Malthusian theory of population. It demonstrates that Carlyle was instead reacting to what he saw as the constraining effects on human behaviour of the endorsement of the market system by contemporary economists, known at the time as practitioners of political economy. It shows that it was Kenneth Boulding who was mainly responsible for the association of the phrase ‘the dismal science’ with the Malthusian theory of population. Looking at each of the historians of economic thought cited by Dixon (2006) as supporting the association of the phrase ‘the dismal science’ with both the Malthusian theory of population and Carlyle, it finds that none provides any evidence for the view that such an association exists. It concludes with speculation as to what Carlyle would have thought of neoclassical economics.

Date: 2018
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/10370196.2019.1575174 (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

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:taf:rherxx:v:70:y:2018:i:1:p:40-48

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/rher20

DOI: 10.1080/10370196.2019.1575174

Access Statistics for this article

History of Economics Review is currently edited by John Harry Bloch and John Hawkins

More articles in History of Economics Review from Taylor & Francis Journals
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Chris Longhurst ().