History of economic thought

Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

The history of economic thought is the study of the philosophies of the different thinkers and theories in the subjects that later became

ancient world
to the present day.

This field encompasses many disparate schools of economic thought. Ancient Greek writers such as the philosopher Aristotle examined ideas about the art of wealth acquisition, and questioned whether property is best left in private or public hands. In the Middle Ages, Thomas Aquinas argued that it was a moral obligation of businesses to sell goods at a just price.[1]

In the Western world, economics was not a separate discipline, but part of philosophy until the 18th–19th century Industrial Revolution and the 19th century Great Divergence, which accelerated economic growth.[2]

Ancient economic thought (before 500 AD)

Ancient Greece

Boeotian
who wrote the earliest known work concerning the basic origins of economic thought, contemporary with Homer.[3] Of the 828 verses in his poem Works and Days, the first 383 centered on the fundamental economic problem of scarce resources for the pursuit of numerous and abundant human ends and desires.

China

laissez faire.[6]

India

Hindu texts Vedas (1700 BCE - 1100 BCE) contain economic ideas but Atharvaveda (1200 BCE) is most vocal about such ideas.[7]

Chanakya (born 350 BC) of the Maurya Empire, authored the Arthashastra along with several Indian sages, a treatise on statecraft, economic policy and military strategy.[8]

The Arthashastra posits the theory that there are four necessary fields of knowledge: the Vedas, the

Lokayata), the science of government, and the science of economics (Varta of agriculture, cattle, and trade). It is from these four that all other knowledge, wealth, and human prosperity is derived.[9]

Greco-Roman world

Plato and his pupil Aristotle had an enduring effect on Western philosophy.

Ancient Athens, an advanced city-state civilisation and progressive society, developed an embryonic model of democracy.[10]

Xenophon's (c. 430–354 BC) Oeconomicus (c. 360 BC) is a dialogue principally about household management and agriculture.

specialization of labor and to production. According to Joseph Schumpeter, Plato was the first known advocate of a credit theory of money that is, money as a unit of account for debt.[11] Plato also argued that collective ownership was necessary to promote common pursuit of the common interest, and to avoid the social divisiveness that would occur "when some grieve exceedingly and others rejoice at the same happenings."[12]

tyranny, oligarchy, and democracy) as a critique of Plato's model of a philosopher-kings. Of particular interest for economists, Plato provided a blueprint of a society based on common ownership of resources. Aristotle viewed this model as an oligarchical anathema. Though Aristotle did certainly advocate holding many things in common, he argued that not everything could be, simply because of the "wickedness of human nature".[13]

"It is clearly better that property should be private", wrote Aristotle, "but the use of it common; and the special business of the legislator is to create in men this benevolent disposition." In Politics Book I, Aristotle discusses the general nature of households and market exchanges. For him there is a certain "art of acquisition" or "wealth-getting", which is necessary and honourable for one's household, while exchange on the retail trade for simply accumulation is "justly censured, for it is dishonorable".[14] Writing of the people, Aristotle stated that they as a whole thought acquisition of wealth (chrematistike) as being either the same as, or a principle of oikonomia ("household management" – oikonomos),[15][16] with oikos meaning "house" and with (themis meaning "custom") nomos meaning "law".[17] Aristotle himself highly disapproved of usury and cast scorn on making money through a monopoly.[18]

Aristotle discarded Plato's credit theory of money for metallism, the theory that money derives its value from the purchasing power of the commodity upon which it is based:

Indeed, riches is assumed by many to be only a quantity of coin, because the arts of getting wealth and retail trade are concerned with coin. Others maintain that coined money is a mere sham, a thing not natural, but conventional only, because, if the users substitute another commodity for it, it is worthless, and because it is not useful as a means to any of the necessities of life, and, indeed, he who is rich in coin may often be in want of necessary food. But how can that be wealth of which a man may have a great abundance and yet perish with hunger, like

Midas in the fable, whose insatiable prayer turned everything that was set before him into gold?.

— Aristotle[19]

Middle Ages

Thomas Aquinas

Thomas Aquinas (1225–1274) taught that high prices in response to high demand is theft.

costs of production
, including the maintenance of a worker and his family. Aquinas argued it was immoral for sellers to raise their prices simply because buyers had a pressing need for a product.

Aquinas discusses a number of topics in the format of questions and replies, substantial tracts dealing with Aristotle's theory. Questions 77 and 78 concern economic issues, primarily what a just price might be, and the fairness of a seller dispensing faulty goods. Aquinas argued against any form of cheating and recommended always paying compensation in lieu of service obtained as it utilized resources. Whilst human laws might not impose sanctions for unfair dealing, divine law did, in his opinion.

Duns Scotus

One of Aquinas' main critics

Sententiae (1295), he thought it possible to be more precise than Aquinas in calculating a just price, emphasizing the costs of labor and expenses, although he recognized that the latter might be inflated by exaggeration, because buyer and seller usually have different ideas of a just price. If people did not benefit from a transaction, in Scotus' view, they would not trade. Scotus said merchants perform a necessary and useful social role by transporting goods and making them available to the public.[20]

Jean Buridan

priest. Buridanus looked at money from two angles: its metal value and its purchasing power, which he acknowledged can vary. He argued that aggregated, not individual, demand and supply
determine market prices. Hence, for him a just price was what the society collectively and not just one individual is willing to pay.

Ibn Khaldun

Ibn Khaldun (1332–1406)
It should be known that at the beginning of a dynasty, taxation yields a large revenue from small assessments. At the end of the dynasty, taxation yields a small revenue from large assessments.[21]
Ibn Khaldun on
taxes and the ideals of Governance

Until

taxes discourage production and actually cause revenues to fall.[24]

Nicole Oresme

Nicolas d'Oresme (1320–82)

French philosopher and priest Nicolas d'Oresme (1320–1382) wrote De origine, natura, jure et mutationibus monetarum, about the origin, nature, law, and alterations of money. It is one of the earliest manuscripts on the concept of money. His treatise argues how money or currency belongs to the public, and that the government or sovereign of the economy has no right to control the value of the currency just so that they can profit from it.

Antonin of Florence

Saint

good
and its practical value. The latter is determined by its suitability to satisfy needs (virtuositas), its rarity (raritas) and its subjective value (complacibilitas). Due to this subjective component, there cannot only be one just price, but a bandwidth of more or less just prices.

Mercantilism and international trade (16th to 18th century)

Marquis de Mirabeau (1715–1789)

Mercantilism dominated Europe from the 16th to the 18th century.[25] Despite the localism of the Middle Ages, the waning of feudalism saw new national economic frameworks begin to strengthen. After the 15th century voyages of Christopher Columbus and other explorers opened up new opportunities for trade with the New World and Asia, newly-powerful monarchies wanted a more powerful military state to boost their status. Mercantilism was a political movement and an economic theory that advocated the use of the state's military power to ensure that local markets and supply sources were protected, spawning protectionism.

French seaport during the heyday of mercantilism

Mercantile theorists held that international trade could not benefit all countries at the same time. Money and precious metals were the only source of riches in their view, and limited resources must be allocated between countries, therefore tariffs should be used to encourage exports, which bring money into the country, and discourage imports which send it abroad. In other words, a positive balance of trade ought to be maintained through a surplus of exports, often backed by military might. Despite the prevalence of the model, the term mercantilism was not coined until 1763, by Victor de Riqueti, marquis de Mirabeau (1715–1789), and popularized by Adam Smith in 1776, who vigorously opposed it.

School of Salamanca

In the 16th century the Jesuit School of Salamanca in Spain developed economic theory to a high level, only to have their contributions[clarification needed], namely the development of an early form of monetarism in response to the introduction of New World gold into the Spanish economy, forgotten until the 20th century.

Sir Thomas More

In 1516 English humanist Sir

English Poor Laws (1587) and the communism-socialism movement.[citation needed
]

Nicolaus Copernicus

In 1517 Polish astronomer Nicolaus Copernicus (1473–1543) published the first known argument for the quantity theory of money. In 1519 he also published the first known form of Gresham's Law: "Bad money drives out good".

Jean Bodin

In 1568

quantity theory of money
.

Barthélemy de Laffemas

Barthélemy de Laffemas (1545–1612)

In 1598 French mercantilist economist Barthélemy de Laffemas (1545–1612) published Les Trésors et richesses pour mettre l'Estat en splendeur, which blasted those who frowned on French silks because the industry created employment for the poor, the first known mention of underconsumption theory, which was later refined by John Maynard Keynes.

Leonardus Lessius

In 1605 Flemish

Jesuit theologian Leonardus Lessius
(1554–1623) published On Justice and Law, the deepest moral-theological study of economics since Aquinas, whose just price approach he claimed was no longer workable. After comparing money's growth via avarice to the propagation of hares, he made the first statement of the price of insurance as being based on risk.

Edward Misselden and Gerard Malynes

In 1622 English merchants

government regulation of companies, with Malynes arguing against foreign exchange as under the control of bankers[clarification needed], and Misselden arguing that international money exchange and fluctuations in the exchange rate depend upon international trade
and not bankers, and that the state should regulate trade to insure export surpluses.

Thomas Mun

English economist Thomas Mun (1571–1641) describes early mercantilist policy in his book England's Treasure by Foreign Trade, which was not published until 1664, although it was widely circulated in manuscript form during his lifetime. A member of the East India Company, he wrote about his experiences in A Discourse of Trade from England unto the East Indies (1621).

Sir William Petty

In 1662 English economist Sir William Petty (1623–1687) began publishing short works applying the rational scientific tradition of Francis Bacon to economics, requiring that it only use measurable phenomena and seek quantitative precision, coining the term "political arithmetic", introducing statistical mathematics, and becoming the first scientific economist.

Philipp von Hörnigk

The title page to Philipp von Hörnigk's statement of mercantilist philosophy.

Ottoman invasion
. In Österreich Über Alles, Wann es Nur Will (1684, Austria Over All, If She Only Will) he laid out one of the clearest statements of mercantile policy, listing nine principal rules of national economy:

"To inspect the country's soil with the greatest care, and not to leave the agricultural possibilities of a single corner or clod of earth unconsidered... All commodities found in a country, which cannot be used in their natural state, should be worked up within the country... Attention should be given to the population, that it may be as large as the country can support... gold and silver once in the country are under no circumstances to be taken out for any purpose... The inhabitants should make every effort to get along with their domestic products... [Foreign commodities] should be obtained not for gold or silver, but in exchange for other domestic wares... and should be imported in unfinished form, and worked up within the country... Opportunities should be sought night and day for selling the country's superfluous goods to these foreigners in manufactured form... No importation should be allowed under any circumstances of which there is a sufficient supply of suitable quality at home."

Nationalism, self-sufficiency and national power were the basic policies proposed.[26]

Jean-Baptiste Colbert and Pierre Le Pesant, Sieur de Boisguilbert

Pierre Le Pesant, sieur de Boisguilbert (1646–1714)

In 1665–1683

crafts in which France specialized, all of which came to require membership in a guild to operate in until the French Revolution. According to Colbert, "It is simply and solely the abundance of money within a state [which] makes the difference in its grandeur and power."[citation needed
]

In 1695 French economist Pierre Le Pesant, sieur de Boisguilbert (1646–1714) wrote a plea to Louis XIV to end Colbert's mercantilist program, containing the first notion of an economical market, becoming the first economist to question mercantile economic policy and value the wealth of a country by its production and exchange of goods instead of its assets.

Charles Davenant

In 1696 British mercantilist Tory Member of parliament Charles Davenant (1656–1714) published Essay on the East India Trade, displaying the first understanding of consumer demand and perfect competition.

Sir James Steuart

Sir James Steuart
(1713–1780)

In 1767 Scottish mercantilist economist

Sir James Steuart (1713–1780) published An Inquiry into the Principles of Political Economy, the first book in English with the term "political economy" in the title, and the first complete economics
treatise.

Mughal Emperor Aurangzeb

Emperor

Fatawa-e-Alamgiri along several Muslim scholars which include Islamic economics,[27][28] whose policies eventually led to the period of Proto-industrialization.[29][30] It lasted as South Asia's principal regulating body until the beginning of the 18th century.[31]

Pre-Classical (17th and 18th century)

The British Enlightenment

In the 17th century Britain went through troubling times, enduring not only political and religious division in the

Glorious Revolution
.

The upheaval was accompanied by a number of major scientific advances, including Robert Boyle's discovery of the gas pressure constant (1660) and Sir Isaac Newton's publication of Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica (1687), which described Newton's laws of motion and his universal law of gravitation.

All these factors spurred the advancement of economic thought. For instance,

labor. The first person to tie these ideas into a political framework was John Locke
.

John Locke

one
coherent framework.

John Locke (1632–1704) was born near Bristol, and educated in London and Oxford. He is considered one of the most significant philosophers of his era mainly for his critique of Thomas Hobbes' defense of absolutism in Leviathan (1651) and of his social contract theory. Locke believed that people contracted into society, which was bound to protect their property rights.[33] He defined property broadly to include people's lives and liberties, as well as their wealth. When people combined their labor with their surroundings, that created property rights. In his words from his Second Treatise on Civil Government (1689):

"God hath given the world to men in common... Yet every man has a property in his own person. The labour of his body and the work of his hands we may say are properly his. Whatsoever, then, he removes out of the state that nature hath provided and left it in, he hath mixed his labour with, and joined to it something that is his own, and thereby makes it his property."[34]

Locke argued that not only should the government cease interference with people's property (or their "lives, liberties and estates"), but also that it should positively work to ensure their protection. His views on

Member of Parliament in 1691 entitled Some Considerations on the Consequences of the Lowering of Interest and the Raising of the Value of Money (1691), arguing that the "price of any commodity rises or falls, by the proportion of the number of buyers and sellers", a rule which "holds universally in all things that are to be bought and sold."[35]

Dudley North

Dudley North (1641–1691) argued that the results of mercantile policy are undesirable.

division of labor and wealth for everyone. Regulation
of trade interferes with these benefits, he said.

David Hume

David Hume (1711–76)

David Hume (1711–1776) agreed with North's philosophy and denounced mercantilist assumptions. His contributions were set down in Political Discourses (1752), and later consolidated in his Essays, Moral, Political, Literary (1777). Adding to the argument that it was undesirable to strive for a favourable balance of trade, Hume argued that it is, in any case, impossible.

Hume held that any surplus of exports would be paid for by imports of gold and silver. This would increase the money supply, causing prices to rise. That in turn would cause a decline in exports until the balance with imports is restored.

Bernard Mandeville

Bernard Mandeville, (1670–1733), was an Anglo-Dutch philosopher, political economist and satirist. His main thesis is that the actions of men cannot be divided into lower and higher. The higher life of man is a mere fiction introduced by philosophers and rulers to simplify government and the relations of society. In fact, virtue (which he defined as "every performance by which man, contrary to the impulse of nature, should endeavour the benefit of others, or the conquest of his own passions, out of a rational ambition of being good") is actually detrimental to the state in its commercial and intellectual progress. This is because it is the vices (i.e., the self-regarding actions of men) which alone, by means of inventions and the circulation of capital (economics) in connection with luxurious living, stimulate society into action and progress.

Francis Hutcheson

Francis Hutcheson (1694–1746), the teacher of Adam Smith from 1737 to 1740[36] is considered the end of a long tradition of thought on economics as "household or family (οἶκος) management",[37] [38] [39] stemming from Xenophon's work Oeconomicus.[40] [41]

The Physiocrats and the circular flow

Similarly disenchanted with regulation on trade inspired by mercantilism, the Frenchman

free enterprise and free trade. He was one of the early physiocrats, who regarded agriculture as the source of wealth. As historian David B. Danbom wrote, the Physiocrats "damned cities for their artificiality and praised more natural styles of living. They celebrated farmers."[42]
Over the end of the seventeenth and beginning of the eighteenth century major advances in
blood circulation through the human body - documented by William Harvey in 1628. This concept was mirrored in the physiocrats' economic theory, with the notion of a circular flow of income throughout an economy
.

Anne Robert Jacques Turgot (1727–1781)

Law of Rent.[citation needed
])

industry
.

In August 1774 King

guilds
, inflamed influential opinion. He was forced from office in 1776.

Classical (18th and 19th century)

Ferdinando Galiani and On Money

In 1751,

.

Adam Smith and The Wealth of Nations

Adam Smith (1723–1790), father of modern political economy.

Adam Smith (1723–1790) is popularly seen as the father of modern political economy. His 1776 publication

industrial revolution
that allowed more wealth to be created on a larger scale than ever before.

Smith was a Scottish moral philosopher, whose first book was The Theory of Moral Sentiments (1759). He argued in it that people's ethical systems develop through personal relations with other individuals, that right and wrong are sensed through others' reactions to one's behaviour. This gained Smith more popularity than his next work, The Wealth of Nations, which the general public initially ignored.[44] Yet Smith's political economic magnum opus was successful in circles that mattered.

Adam Smith's Invisible Hand

"It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer or the baker, that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own self-interest. We address ourselves, not to their humanity but to their self-love, and never talk to them of our own necessities but of their advantages."[45]
Adam Smith's famous statement on self-interest

Smith argued for a "system of natural liberty"[46] where individual effort was the producer of social good. Smith believed even the selfish within society were kept under restraint and worked for the good of all when acting in a competitive market. Prices are often unrepresentative of the true value of goods and services. Following John Locke, Smith thought true value of things derived from the amount of labour invested in them.

Every man is rich or poor according to the degree in which he can afford to enjoy the necessaries, conveniencies, and amusements of human life. But after the division of labour has once thoroughly taken place, it is but a very small part of these with which a man's own labour can supply him. The far greater part of them he must derive from the labour of other people, and he must be rich or poor according to the quantity of that labour which he can command, or which he can afford to purchase. The value of any commodity, therefore, to the person who possesses it, and who means not to use or consume it himself, but to exchange it for other commodities, is equal to the quantity of labour which it enables him to purchase or command. Labour, therefore, is the real measure of the exchangeable value of all commodities. The real price of every thing, what every thing really costs to the man who wants to acquire it, is the toil and trouble of acquiring it.

— [47]

When the butchers, the brewers and the bakers acted under the restraint of an open market economy, their pursuit of self-interest, thought Smith, paradoxically drives the process to correct real life prices to their just values. His classic statement on competition goes as follows.

When the quantity of any commodity which is brought to market falls short of the effectual demand, all those who are willing to pay... cannot be supplied with the quantity which they want... Some of them will be willing to give more. A competition will begin among them, and the market price will rise... When the quantity brought to market exceeds the effectual demand, it cannot be all sold to those who are willing to pay the whole value of the rent, wages and profit, which must be paid to bring it thither... The market price will sink...[48]

Limitations

Adam Smith's title page of The Wealth of Nations.

Smith's vision of a free market economy, based on secure property, capital accumulation, widening markets and a division of labour contrasted with the mercantilist tendency to attempt to "regulate all evil human actions."[46] Smith believed there were precisely three legitimate functions of government. The third function was...

...erecting and maintaining certain public works and certain public institutions, which it can never be for the interest of any individual or small number of individuals, to erect and maintain... Every system which endeavours... to draw towards a particular species of industry a greater share of the capital of the society than what would naturally go to it... retards, instead of accelerating, the progress of the society toward real wealth and greatness.

In addition to the necessity of public leadership in certain sectors Smith argued, secondly, that cartels were undesirable because of their potential to limit production and quality of goods and services.[49] Thirdly, Smith criticised government support of any kind of monopoly which always charges the highest price "which can be squeezed out of the buyers".[50] The existence of monopoly and the potential for cartels, which would later form the core of competition law policy, could distort the benefits of free markets to the advantage of businesses at the expense of consumer sovereignty.

William Pitt the Younger

customs and within twenty years Smith had a following of new generation writers who were intent on building the science of political economy.[44]

Edmund Burke

Edmund Burke (1729–1797)

Adam Smith expressed an affinity to the opinions of Irish MP Edmund Burke (1729–1797), known widely as a political philosopher:

"Burke is the only man I ever knew who thinks on economic subjects exactly as I do without any previous communication having passed between us.[52]

Burke was an established political economist himself, known for his book

Industrial revolution
taking place, and in the seeming chaos without the feudal and monarchical structures of Europe, show there was order still.

Jeremy Bentham

Jeremy Bentham (1748–1832) believed in "the greatest good for the greatest number".

atheist, a prison reformer, animal rights activist, believer in universal suffrage, freedom of speech, free trade and health insurance at a time when few dared to argue for any of these ideas. He was schooled rigorously from an early age, finishing university and being called to the bar at 18. His first book, A Fragment on Government (1776), published anonymously, was a trenchant critique of William Blackstone's Commentaries on the Laws of England. This gained wide success until it was found that the young Bentham, and not a revered Professor had penned it. In An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation (1789) Bentham set out his theory of utility.[53][54]

Jean-Baptiste Say

goods
.

Say agreed that a part of income is saved by households, but in the long term, savings are invested. Investment and consumption are the two elements of demand, so that production is demand, therefore it is impossible for production to outrun demand, or for there to be a "general glut" of supply. Say also argued that money was neutral, because its sole role is to facilitate exchanges, therefore, people demand money only to buy commodities; "money is a veil".[56]

David Ricardo

David Ricardo (1772–1823) is renowned for his law of comparative advantage.

House of Commons.[57] Ricardo's best known work is On the Principles of Political Economy and Taxation (1817), which contains his critique of barriers to international trade and a description of the manner in which income is distributed in the population. Ricardo made a distinction between workers, who received a wage fixed to a level at which they could survive, the landowners, who earn a rent, and capitalists, who own capital and receive a profit, a residual part of the income.[58]

If population grows, it becomes necessary to cultivate additional land, whose fertility is lower than that of already cultivated fields, because of the law of decreasing productivity. Therefore, the cost of the production of the wheat increases, as well as the price of the wheat: The rents increase also, the wages, indexed to inflation (because they must allow workers to survive) as well. Profits decrease, until the capitalists can no longer invest. The economy, Ricardo concluded, is bound to tend towards a

Jean Charles Léonard de Sismondi

Jean Charles Léonard de Sismondi(1773–1842) was the earliest author of systemic Crisis theory.

John Stuart Mill

John Stuart Mill (1806–1873), educated in the philosophy of Jeremy Bentham, wrote the most authoritative economics text of his time.

John Stuart Mill (1806–1873) was the dominant figure of political economic thought of his time, as well as a Member of parliament for the seat of Westminster, and a leading political philosopher. Mill was a child prodigy, reading Ancient Greek from the age of 3, and being vigorously schooled by his father James Mill.[59] Jeremy Bentham was a close mentor and family friend, and Mill was heavily influenced by David Ricardo. Mill's textbook, first published in 1848 and titled Principles of Political Economy was essentially a summary of the economic thought of the mid-nineteenth century.[60]

Principles of Political Economy (1848) was used as the standard text by most universities well into the beginning of the twentieth century.[citation needed] On the question of economic growth Mill tried to find a middle ground between Adam Smith's view of ever-expanding opportunities for trade and technological innovation and Thomas Malthus' view of the inherent limits of population. In his fourth book Mill set out a number of possible future outcomes, rather than predicting one in particular.[56]

Classical political economy

The classical economists were referred to as a group for the first time by

depopulation, precariousness, poverty, apparition of a working class
.

They wondered about population growth, because demographic transition had begun in Great Britain at that time. They also asked many fundamental questions, about the source of value, the causes of economic growth and the role of money in the economy. They supported a free-market economy, arguing it was a natural system based upon freedom and property. However, these economists were divided and did not make up a unified current of thought.

A notable current within classical economics was

Manchester capitalism, which advocated free trade, against the previous policy of mercantilism
.

Marxian critique of political economy

Karl Marx (1818–1883) published a critique of political economy.