2009/11/01 by Michel De Vroey · 2 citations
Economics, Econometrics and Finance · #Argument (complex analysis) #Economic Theory and Institutions #Economic Theory and Policy #Economic theories and models #Economics #Epistemology #General equilibrium theory #Mathematical economics #Microeconomics #Neoclassical economics #Philosophy #Physics #Positive economics #Sociology #Viewpoints
paper · doi:10.1215/00182702-2009-038
openalex publication_date 2009/11/01 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/07/15
The aim of this essay is to examine economists' views about the relationship between Marshallian and Walrasian theory. Are they complementary, as is usually believed, or do they constitute alternative research programs? I compare two viewpoints on this matter, the conciliatory and the antagonistic. After describing these, I present my own standpoint: I believe that there is a Marshall–Walras divide, but I have serious objections to the way in which the argument for this divide is usually made. In the last part of the paper, I examine the view held by several authors that an embryonic general equilibrium model is to be found in Marshall's Principles.