Customer Reviews

Economic Theory in Retrospect

5 star:		(2)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

I have always felt uneasy with this book since I was an under graduated student, 30 years ago. This is undoubtedly a quiet useful book for anyone who needs a bird's-eye view of the classics in economics. If you don't have time to read Smith's Wealth of Nations or Marshall's Principles, here you have the book you need. However, it is not here that you can look for a good analysis of the meaning and implications of the main schools of economic thought, as well as the relevance of the work of its most distinguished authors and their social and intellectual environment. That is reason why I always preferred Schumpeter's History of Economic Analysis. Today, that I am lecturing this course my dissatisfaction has increased, among other reasons because you have more and better textbooks, such as Lionel Robbins' History of Economic Thought, Mark Skoussen's Making of Modern Economics, or Jürg Niehams' History of Economic Theory, which I really enjoyed reading because they try to make a portrayal of the intellectual and human stature of the most important economists of all times and their background.

The standard text for anyone who wishes to analyse economic theory. Blaug takes the approach that an economic theory can be criticised on two levels. It may have a mismatch with the environment and or it may be internally flawed as a theory. By concentrating on theory Blaug helps the reader acquire their own critical faculties for assessing economic theories without getting bogged down on endless details associated with, "but things were different then," or with defendants of marxist economic theory, "but things would be different."

I have always felt uneasy with this book since I was an under graduated student, 30 years ago. This is undoubtedly a quiet useful book for anyone who needs a bird's-eye view of the classics in economics. If you don't have time to read Smith's Wealth of Nations or Marshall's Principles, here you have the book you need. However, it is not here that you can look for a good analysis of the meaning and implications of the main schools of economic thought, as well as the relevance of the work of its most distinguished authors and their social and intellectual environment. That is reason why I always preferred Schumpeter's History of Economic Analysis. Today, that I am lecturing this course my dissatisfaction has increased, among other reasons because you have more and better textbooks, such as Lionel Robbins' History of Economic Thought, Mark Skoussen's Making of Modern Economics, or Jürg Niehams' History of Economic Theory, which I really enjoyed reading because they try to make a portrayal of the intellectual and human stature of the most important economists of all times and their background.

Seriously this is one of the best books I've read in years. A great historical account of the field of economics. After finishing this book, I have a much better appreciation for economic history and it's main intellectual contributors. The suggestions for further reading after each chapter is complete gold and I plan on tackling many of those books. As I reading through the book, I become simply amazed at the depth of the writer's knowledge. In summary, if you are hard core fan of economics I believe you will simply love and cherish this book.

The problem with this book is that it offers an astounding bibliography, being therefore a mandatory list to further readings, but unfortunately it is entirely teleological, as it considers neoclessic economics of the most conservative kind to represent the acme of all economic thinking.

as an econ major i found this book highly informative and interesting. however, if you are not mathematically inclined you might find some of the models and graphs difficult to follow, especially the ones involving differential equations.
but if you are an econ dude, this book is great. lots of insight about how commonly used theories and models came about. well written for the most part, but somewhat wordy at times.