efaw.PDF


 THE ROLE OF CORE TEXTS IN HISTORY OF ECONOMIC THOUGHT 

by 

Fritz Efaw* 

Abstract 

This paper compares the integration of core texts found in two widely used textbooks on the history of economic 
thought by examining the treatment of two well-known historical texts.  The difference in approach between the 
two authors has pedagogical implications for the role of a history of thought course in the curriculum; in addition 
it echoes a much older and deeper debate over the use of core texts from the canon. 

I. Introduction

Undergraduate degree programs in economics usually offer, and frequently require, a course in the history 
of economic thought.  Although instructors typically employ portions of core texts in these courses, the central 
course text is likely to be a general textbook on the subject in which successive economic thinkers are viewed as (1) 
comparable to natural scientists who explore previously undiscovered principles about economies and behavior of 
economic agents; or (2) creators of progressively superior "tools of analysis"; but always (3) best understood from 
the perspective of current economic theory.  Core texts are rarely integrated into textbooks except through short 
passages appearing in inserted boxes. 

This note compares the integration of core texts in two widely known books that do a better job than most-
-Economic Theory in Retrospect, by Mark Blaug (1996), and Development of Economic Analysis, by Ingrid Rima
(1996).  Both books are lengthy, and perhaps better suited to graduate study, but can also be used in undergraduate
courses.  They differ in the degree to which they integrate core texts: Blaug provides lengthy synopses of some
major works, while Rima offers multi-page passages from the same works together with brief summaries.

I compare these two approaches by examining the treatment of two well-known historical texts.  The first, 
from the eighteenth century, is Adam Smith’s description of division of labor in The Wealth of Nations; the 
second, from the twentieth century, is John Maynard Keynes'�discussion of uncertainty in an article related to his 
best known major work, The General Theory.  Rima provides passages from both texts along with comments, 
while Blaug gives a detailed synopsis of each book.  Both authors go into ideas in greater depth than most textbook 
writers in history of economic thought, but direct exposure of the reader to original texts varies considerably 
between the volumes. 

II. Core Text vs. Synopsis: A Brief Comparison

Book I, chapter 2, of Smith's Wealth of Nations contains a description of a hypothetical pin factory.  
Because the workers specialize in different tasks, they produce more pins together than they would without 
specialization.  Smith's story exemplifies a hypothetical but concrete instance of a theme he follows throughout the 
book.  The story also serves as the starting point in a long and circuitous line of reasoning that will encompass an 
encyclopaedic description of capitalism and an enduring synthesis of economic thought at his time.  It is worth 
reading because it is well known, because the point Smith makes is important in his theories, and because it is a 
fine example of his writing. 

*
Associate Professor of Economics, Department of Economics University of Tennessee at Chattanooga 615

McCallie Avenue Chattanooga, TN 37403.  Email: fritz_efaw@utc.edu

57



58 

Rima presents most of this fairly short chapter in her book, followed by a much briefer explanation.  
Blaug, by contrast, tantalizes the reader with a description of specifically this part of Wealth of Nations as "a 
beautiful example of eighteenth century prose," (Blaug, 1996:35) but fails to reveal its beauty to the reader.  When 
he does quote a section, it is to present a fairly abstract discussion of price determination, illustrated with an even 
more abstract supply-and-demand diagram, a conceptual device developed more than a century later.  The 
advantage of Blaug's approach is that it helps someone trained in twentieth century economics to gain an 
understanding of an eighteenth century writer in twentieth century terms.  The disadvantage is that it fails to 
communicate the subtlety of Smith's eighteenth century notions of market price and natural price. 

In 1937 John Maynard Keynes published an article in a leading economics journal, the Quarterly Journal 
of Economics, summarizing his most important work, The General Theory, published the previous year.  The 
article draws on ideas Keynes wrote about earlier in his life, and for some economists, it can be taken as a point of 
departure for understanding much of his work.  It also contains some of Keynes' best known and most frequently 
quoted lines. 

Blaug does not conceal his low opinion of Keynes' writing in The General Theory, calling it "one of the 
most difficult books in the entire history of economics," full of "crabbed" prose, obscure formulations and 
digressions upon digressions" (Blaug, 1996:651).  As with Wealth of Nations, Blaug provides a chapter-by-chapter 
synopsis of The General Theory, followed by comments on how various later writers and schools of thought have 
adopted one chapter or another for emphasis.   

Rima's treatment of Keynes is similar to Blaug's insofar as it traces the logic of Keynes’ thinking in The 
General Theory and gives attention to the variety of interpretations the work has spawned.  Her chapter on Keynes, 
however, is anchored by two extended passages, one from near the beginning of the book, and the other from the 
journal article just cited.  In each case the extended passage becomes the starting point for a discussion that 
follows. This allows the reader to have at least some direct exposure to Keynes' writing in the context of the 1930s, 
if not the context of subsequent developments in economic theory. 

III. Historical Digression: Ancient and Modern

The difference in approach between the two authors considered here has pedagogical implications for the 
role of a history of thought course in the curriculum, but in addition it echoes a much older and deeper debate over 
the use of core texts from the canon.  The pedagogical issue comes down to the fact that students invariably find 
core texts from the past difficult to read and understand.  Instructors and textbooks typically respond by pointing 
out that when students study these texts they develop skills associated with critical thinking, they become immersed 
in the tradition of the discipline, and they develop a deeper understanding of principles providing the basis of 
economic behavior.  At the same time a textbook or course may either use core texts to focus the student's attention 
on historical context, or present the same text as anticipating subsequent developments in economic theory.  The 
deeper debate recalls a divergence of views that took place at the time of the early development of economics as a 
social science in the seventeenth century, referred to at the time as the quarrel between the ancients and the 
moderns (see, e.g., Swift [1697]).  On one side of the debate stood Renaissance humanists, who promoted study of 
ancient Greeks and Romans, along with an outlook on life that revered thinkers from the past.  In the opposing 
camp were Enlightenment modernists, who created new intellectual frameworks emphasizing science, progress, 
and the future.  

To proponents of science, knowledge was cumulative, improving over time by absorbing and replacing 
older ways of thought.  Scientists like Copernicus, Galileo, and Kepler successfully challenged conventional beliefs 
in astronomy.  Harvey, Huygens, and Newton made new discoveries and applications in physiology and 
mathematics.  Whole new ways of thinking were developed by Bacon, Hobbes, and Descartes.  Classic works were 
abandoned in favor of new ideas, thus depreciating the value of the humanities. 

From the opposing traditionalist perspective, the new knowledge of modern science had little to offer 



beyond mere system building and theorizing.  Rather than revealing useful insights, science produced only creative 
confusion.  From their point of view, the humanities arrived at truth through works that remain alive over time.  
Homer's portrayal of anger in Achilles and Sophocles' description of the tragic fall of Oedipus showed insights into 
thoughts and emotions that remain unsurpassed.  Later writers could only add and elaborate employing modern 
settings and literary forms like the novel.  These stood for the solidity of a longstanding tradition; the changing 
nature of scientific knowledge simply reveals its unfinished instability. 

An enduring legacy of the quarrel between the ancients and the moderns is the distinction in academe 
between the humanities and the sciences.  By the nineteenth century the impact of science on the curriculum was 
clear, but its introduction for the sake of practical applied learning was balanced with preservation of classics, 
thought to ensure rigor and mental discipline.  The problem in drawing this distinction, however, was that not all 
disciplines could be classified as neatly as astronomy and literature.  Philosophy, for example, sometimes looked 
like science, but at other times it more closely resembled literature.  Ideas about economics were presented in 
mathematical form by William Petty and in literary form by Bernard de Mandeville.  While mathematical 
reasoning has generally come to dominate economics, this dual character once present in all nascent social sciences 
continues a subterranean existence periodically brought to light by economists like Donald McCloskey (1985) and 
Warren Samuels (1990).  

IV. Conclusion

If the goal of a course in history of economic thought is to have students learn to understand the 
development of economic theory as a more-or-less linear progression of ideas, then textbooks that single out 
particular contributions from past writers at the risk of distorting the overall vision of their authors is efficacious.  
Use of core texts may even hinder this goal.  But if other goals are admitted and even allowed to displace this one, 
then core texts are indispensable.  Two such alternative goals come to mind immediately--core texts expose 
students to the rhetorical style of economists, and core texts reveal economists grappling with immediate social and 
political debates of their times.  The power of Adam Smith’s condemnation of monopoly as well as his detailed 
historical knowledge of money and trade are best revealed through his writing and not through a gloss from a 
subsequent author who understands him primarily in terms of later events and theories.  The pressing concern that 
Keynes shows for unemployment and the future of entrepreneurial capitalism in the context of the great depression 
is likewise best demonstrated by reading him as addressing those issues rather than as primarily a writer divorced 
from a specific historical context. 

References 

Blaug, Mark. 1996. Economic Theory in Retrospect, 5th edition, New York: Cambridge Univ. Press. 

Keynes, John Maynard. 1937. The General Theory of Employment, Quarterly Journal of Economics 51. 

McCloskey, Donald N. 1985. The Rhetoric of Economics. Madison, WI: Univ. of Wisconsin Press. 

Rima, Ingrid Hahne. 1996. Development of Economic Analysis, 5th edition, London: Routledge. 

Samuels, Warren. 1990. Economics as Discourse. Boston: Kluwer. 

Swift, Jonathan. 1984 [1697]. A Full and True Account of the Battle Fought last Friday Between the Antient and 
the Modern Books in St. James Library. Reprinted in Angus Ross and David Wooley, eds., Jonathan Swift. New 
York: Oxford Press. 

59