| Abstract: | The double contrast between allocation and process and between formal proof and empirically based reasoning is selectively applied to the history of economics. Hume's rejection of provable knowledge led to Smith's psychological explanation of science and thence to his theory of growth through the division of labour. Marshall's cautious theorizing and cognitively based evolutionary perspective stimulated contrasting responses from Sraffa and Young. Robinson matched method to content but Chamberlin did not, and Andrews's attempt to develop a process-based price theory met more resistance than Penrose's reinvention of growth theory. We currently observe conflicting methods of handling evolution and business strategy. |
