Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

LÉON WALRAS: NEOKLASİK İKTİSADIN "FİZİKO-MATEMATİKSEL" BİR BİLİM OLARAK İNŞASI

Year 2017, ICMEB17 Özel Sayısı, 131 - 142, 01.12.2017

Hüsnü Bilir

Abstract

Neoklasik iktisadın kurucuları arasında yer alan Walras, iktisat disiplininin klasik ekonomi politikten neoklasik iktisada geçiş sürecindeki belki de en önemli isimdir. Pozitivist bilim anlayışını benimseyen Walras, çalışma sahasını "iktisadın pür teorisi" olarak adlandırdığı bölümle sınırlandırmıştır. Walras, bu çerçevede, iktisadı doğa bilimleri ve bilhassa fizik gibi tahayyül etmiş ve iktisadi analizde matematiğin kullanılmasının zaruri olduğunu savunmuştur. Bu çalışmada da, Walras'ın neoklasik iktisadın oluşumundaki rolünü vurgulamak amacıyla, öncelikle Walras'ın "bilim" ve "iktisat" tahayyülleri ele alınacak, daha sonra ise "birey" tahayyülü üzerinde durulacaktır.

Keywords

Léon Walras Neoklasik İktisat Fiziko-Matematiksel İktisat İktisadın Pür Teorisi

References

  • Arena, R. (2002). Schumpeter on Walras. In R. Arena, C. Dangel-Hagnauer (Eds.). The contribution of Joseph Schumpeter to economics: Economic development and institutional change, London and New York: Routledge, 40-65.
  • Aspromourgos, T. (1986). On the origins of the term Neoclassical. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 10(3), 265- 270.
  • Blaug, M. (1985). Economic theory in retrospect, Fourth edition, New York: Cambridge University Press.
  • Boettke, P. J., Leeson, P. T. & Smith, D. J. (2008). The evolution of economics: Where we are and how we got here. The Long Term View, 7(1), 14-22.
  • Buddharaksa, W. (2010, December). Positivism, anti-positivism and neo-Gramscianism. RCAPS Working Paper, No. http://www.apu.ac.jp/rcaps/uploads/fckeditor/publications/workingPapers/RCAPS_WP10-4.pdf. Retreived October 8, 2015, from
  • Buğra, A. (2013). İktisatçılar ve insanlar, Dokuzuncu baskı, İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları.
  • Bürgenmeier, B. (1994). The micperception of Walras. The American Economic Review, 84(1), 342-352.
  • Caldwell, B. J. (1980). Positivist philosophy of science and the methodology of economics. Journal of Economic Issues, 14(1), 53-76.
  • Cevizci, A. (1999). Paradigma felsefe sözlüğü, Üçüncü baskı, İstanbul: Paradigma Yayıncılık.
  • Colander, D. (2000). The death of neoclassical economics. The Journal of the History of the Economic Thought, 22(2), 127-143.
  • Davar, E. (2002). Mainstream mathematical economics in the 20th Century: by Nicola, P. C. (Springer, 2000) 521 pp. ISBN 3-540-67084-X. European Journal of Political Economy, 18(2), 401-404.
  • Elahi, K. (2014). Behavioral controversy concerning homo economicus: A humean perspective. The Journal of Philosophical Economics, 7(2), 2-29.
  • Fine, B. & Milonakis, D. (2014). İktisat emperyalizminden acayip iktisada: İktisat ve diğer sosyal bilimler arasında değişen sınırlar, (Çev. E. Kırmızıaltın, H. Bilir). Ankara: Heretik Yayıncılık.
  • Fontaine, P. (1993). The lost art of economics: Correspondence. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 7(3), 209-211.
  • Friedman, M. (1955). Leon Walras and his economic system. The American Economic Review, 45(5), 900-909.
  • Fullbrook, E. (2008). A guide to what’s wrong with economics, London: Anthem Press.
  • Goodwin, N., Harris, J., Nelson, J., Roach, B. & Torras, M. (2014). Microeconomics in context. Third edition, New York: M. E. Sharpe.
  • Hennings, K. & Samuels, W. J. (1990). Neoclassical Economic Theory, 1870 to 1930, Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers Group.
  • Herfeld, C. (2014). The economist’s persisting commitment to methodological rationalism. Paper presented at the First Witten Conference on Institutional Change: Money, Credit&Banking, Witten, Germany.
  • Howitt, P. W. (1973). Walras and monetary theory. Economic Inquiry, 11(4), 487-499.
  • Ingrao, B. &Israel, G. (1990). The invisible hand: Economic equilibrium in the history of scienc,. Massachusetts: MIT Press.
  • Jaffé, W. (1935). Unpublished papers and letters of Léon Walras. Journal of Political Economy, 43(2), 187-207.
  • Jaffé, W. (1965). Correspondence of Leon Walras and related papers, Three Volumes. Amsterdam: North-Holland Publishing Company.
  • Jaffé, W. (1980). Walras’s economics as others see it. Journal of Economic Literature, 18(2), 528-549.
  • Jaffé, W. (1983). William Jaffé’s essays on Walras. D. Walker (Ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Jensen, H. E. (1977). Economics as social economics: The views of the ‘founding fathers’. Review of Social Economy, 35(3), 239-257.
  • Jolink, A. (1996). The evolutionist economics of Léon Walras, London: Routledge.
  • Koppl, R. (1992). Price theory as physics: The Cartesian influence in Walras. Methodos, 4(2), 17-28.
  • Koppl, R. (1995). The Walras paradox. Eastern Economic Journal, 21(1). 43-55.
  • Meheus, J. (1999). The positivists’ approach to scientific discovery. Philosophia, 64(2), 81-108.
  • Michie, J., Oughton, C. & Wilkinson, F. (2002). Against the new economic imperialism: Some reflections. American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 61(1), 351-365.
  • Milonakis, D. & Fine, B. (2009). From political economy to economics: Method, the social and the historical in the evolution of economic theory. Oxon: Routledge.
  • Morishima, M. (1977). Walras' economics: A pure theory of capital and Money, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Murzi, M. (2010). Positivism. In M. Bevir (Ed.). Encyclopedia of political theory, Berkeley: University of California Press, 1083-1086.
  • Nachane, D. M. (2008). The unity of science principle and the ‘unreasonable effectiveness’ of neoclassical economics. Economic and Political Weekly, 43(12/13), 79-88.
  • Negishi, T. (1985). Economic theories in a non-Walrasian tradition, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Nicola, P. (2000). Mainstream mathematical economics in the 20th century, Berlin: Springer.
  • Öktem, Ü. (1999). Descartes’da bilginin kesinliği problemi. Ankara Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi, 40(1), 311-332.
  • Pokorny, D. (1978). Smith and Walras: Two theories of science. The Canadian Journal of Economics, 11(3), 387- 403.
  • Pressman, S. (2006). Fifty major economists, Second edition, London: Routledge.
  • Riley, D. (2007). The paradox of positivism. Social Science History, 31(1), 115-126.
  • Rima, I. (1996). Can neoclassical economics be social economics? Forum for Social Economics, 26(1), 5-13.
  • Rugina, A. N. (1987). Toward a third revolution in social economics: The pathbreaking role of Walras. Journal of Economics and Business, 37(3), 514-563.
  • Sarfati, M. (2011). Spinoza-Smith ve iktisat teorisine bir eleştiri. İçinde E. Eren ve M. Sarfati (ed.), İktisatta yeni yaklaşımlar, İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları, 105-134.
  • Schumpeter, J. (1954). History of economic analysi,. Taylor&Francis e-Library.
  • Tarascio, V. J. (1999). The problem of scope: Walras and Pareto. Revue Européenne des Sciences Sociales, 37(116), 315-324.
  • Taylor, T. (1998). Legacies of great economists, Chantilly: The Teaching Company. Van Daal, http://wp.unil.ch/walras/files/2011/03/8.jan-van-daal.pdf. Translating Léon Walras études. Erişim Tarihi: 02.01.2015
  • Walker, D. A. (1970). Léon Walras in the light of his correspondence and related papers. Journal of Political Economy, 78(4), 685-701.
  • Walker, D. A. (1987). Edgeworth versus Walras on the theory of tatonnement. Eastern Economic Journal, 13(2), 155-165.
  • Walker, D. A. (2005). Walras’s market models, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Walker, D. A. (2006). Walrasian economics, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Walras, L. (1954). Elements of pure economics or the theory of social wealth, (Çev. W. Jaffé). London: George Allen and Unwin Ltd.
  • Walras, L. (2005). Studies in applied economics: Theory of the production of social wealth, (Çev. J. Van Daal). Oxon: Routledge.
  • Walras, L. (2010). Studies in social economics, (Çev. J. Van Daal, D. Walker). Oxon: Routledge.
  • Yılmaz, F. (2012). İktisat, kurumsal iktisat ve iktisat sosyolojisi. Sosyoloji Konferansları, 45, 1-17.
  • Zafirovski, M. (1999). How ‘neo-classical’ is neoclassical economics? With special reference to value theory. History of Economics Review, 29, 45-69.
  • Zalewska, A. (2002). From the genealogy of mathematical economics: Walras, Pareto and Lange. Grammar and Rhetoric, 5(18), 47-55.

LÉON WALRAS: THE BUILDING OF NEOCLASSICAL ECONOMICS AS A PSYCHO-MATHEMATICAL SCIENCE

Year 2017, ICMEB17 Özel Sayısı, 131 - 142, 01.12.2017

Hüsnü Bilir

Abstract

Walras, one of the founders of neoclassical economics, is maybe the most important figure in transition process from classical political economy to neoclassical economics. Walras espoused positivist scientific approach and confined his field of study to "the pure theory of economics" as he dubbed it. Walras consequently conceived economics like natural sciences, especially physics, and argued that it was necessary to use mathematics in economic analysis. In this paper, in order to emphasize the role of Walras in formation of neoclassical economics, firstly Walras' conceptions of "science" and "economics" and then his conception of "individual" will be elaborated

Keywords

Léon Walras Neoclassical Economics Psycho-Mathematical Economics The Pure Theory of Economics

References

  • Arena, R. (2002). Schumpeter on Walras. In R. Arena, C. Dangel-Hagnauer (Eds.). The contribution of Joseph Schumpeter to economics: Economic development and institutional change, London and New York: Routledge, 40-65.
  • Aspromourgos, T. (1986). On the origins of the term Neoclassical. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 10(3), 265- 270.
  • Blaug, M. (1985). Economic theory in retrospect, Fourth edition, New York: Cambridge University Press.
  • Boettke, P. J., Leeson, P. T. & Smith, D. J. (2008). The evolution of economics: Where we are and how we got here. The Long Term View, 7(1), 14-22.
  • Buddharaksa, W. (2010, December). Positivism, anti-positivism and neo-Gramscianism. RCAPS Working Paper, No. http://www.apu.ac.jp/rcaps/uploads/fckeditor/publications/workingPapers/RCAPS_WP10-4.pdf. Retreived October 8, 2015, from
  • Buğra, A. (2013). İktisatçılar ve insanlar, Dokuzuncu baskı, İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları.
  • Bürgenmeier, B. (1994). The micperception of Walras. The American Economic Review, 84(1), 342-352.
  • Caldwell, B. J. (1980). Positivist philosophy of science and the methodology of economics. Journal of Economic Issues, 14(1), 53-76.
  • Cevizci, A. (1999). Paradigma felsefe sözlüğü, Üçüncü baskı, İstanbul: Paradigma Yayıncılık.
  • Colander, D. (2000). The death of neoclassical economics. The Journal of the History of the Economic Thought, 22(2), 127-143.
  • Davar, E. (2002). Mainstream mathematical economics in the 20th Century: by Nicola, P. C. (Springer, 2000) 521 pp. ISBN 3-540-67084-X. European Journal of Political Economy, 18(2), 401-404.
  • Elahi, K. (2014). Behavioral controversy concerning homo economicus: A humean perspective. The Journal of Philosophical Economics, 7(2), 2-29.
  • Fine, B. & Milonakis, D. (2014). İktisat emperyalizminden acayip iktisada: İktisat ve diğer sosyal bilimler arasında değişen sınırlar, (Çev. E. Kırmızıaltın, H. Bilir). Ankara: Heretik Yayıncılık.
  • Fontaine, P. (1993). The lost art of economics: Correspondence. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 7(3), 209-211.
  • Friedman, M. (1955). Leon Walras and his economic system. The American Economic Review, 45(5), 900-909.
  • Fullbrook, E. (2008). A guide to what’s wrong with economics, London: Anthem Press.
  • Goodwin, N., Harris, J., Nelson, J., Roach, B. & Torras, M. (2014). Microeconomics in context. Third edition, New York: M. E. Sharpe.
  • Hennings, K. & Samuels, W. J. (1990). Neoclassical Economic Theory, 1870 to 1930, Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers Group.
  • Herfeld, C. (2014). The economist’s persisting commitment to methodological rationalism. Paper presented at the First Witten Conference on Institutional Change: Money, Credit&Banking, Witten, Germany.
  • Howitt, P. W. (1973). Walras and monetary theory. Economic Inquiry, 11(4), 487-499.
  • Ingrao, B. &Israel, G. (1990). The invisible hand: Economic equilibrium in the history of scienc,. Massachusetts: MIT Press.
  • Jaffé, W. (1935). Unpublished papers and letters of Léon Walras. Journal of Political Economy, 43(2), 187-207.
  • Jaffé, W. (1965). Correspondence of Leon Walras and related papers, Three Volumes. Amsterdam: North-Holland Publishing Company.
  • Jaffé, W. (1980). Walras’s economics as others see it. Journal of Economic Literature, 18(2), 528-549.
  • Jaffé, W. (1983). William Jaffé’s essays on Walras. D. Walker (Ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Jensen, H. E. (1977). Economics as social economics: The views of the ‘founding fathers’. Review of Social Economy, 35(3), 239-257.
  • Jolink, A. (1996). The evolutionist economics of Léon Walras, London: Routledge.
  • Koppl, R. (1992). Price theory as physics: The Cartesian influence in Walras. Methodos, 4(2), 17-28.
  • Koppl, R. (1995). The Walras paradox. Eastern Economic Journal, 21(1). 43-55.
  • Meheus, J. (1999). The positivists’ approach to scientific discovery. Philosophia, 64(2), 81-108.
  • Michie, J., Oughton, C. & Wilkinson, F. (2002). Against the new economic imperialism: Some reflections. American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 61(1), 351-365.
  • Milonakis, D. & Fine, B. (2009). From political economy to economics: Method, the social and the historical in the evolution of economic theory. Oxon: Routledge.
  • Morishima, M. (1977). Walras' economics: A pure theory of capital and Money, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Murzi, M. (2010). Positivism. In M. Bevir (Ed.). Encyclopedia of political theory, Berkeley: University of California Press, 1083-1086.
  • Nachane, D. M. (2008). The unity of science principle and the ‘unreasonable effectiveness’ of neoclassical economics. Economic and Political Weekly, 43(12/13), 79-88.
  • Negishi, T. (1985). Economic theories in a non-Walrasian tradition, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Nicola, P. (2000). Mainstream mathematical economics in the 20th century, Berlin: Springer.
  • Öktem, Ü. (1999). Descartes’da bilginin kesinliği problemi. Ankara Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi, 40(1), 311-332.
  • Pokorny, D. (1978). Smith and Walras: Two theories of science. The Canadian Journal of Economics, 11(3), 387- 403.
  • Pressman, S. (2006). Fifty major economists, Second edition, London: Routledge.
  • Riley, D. (2007). The paradox of positivism. Social Science History, 31(1), 115-126.
  • Rima, I. (1996). Can neoclassical economics be social economics? Forum for Social Economics, 26(1), 5-13.
  • Rugina, A. N. (1987). Toward a third revolution in social economics: The pathbreaking role of Walras. Journal of Economics and Business, 37(3), 514-563.
  • Sarfati, M. (2011). Spinoza-Smith ve iktisat teorisine bir eleştiri. İçinde E. Eren ve M. Sarfati (ed.), İktisatta yeni yaklaşımlar, İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları, 105-134.
  • Schumpeter, J. (1954). History of economic analysi,. Taylor&Francis e-Library.
  • Tarascio, V. J. (1999). The problem of scope: Walras and Pareto. Revue Européenne des Sciences Sociales, 37(116), 315-324.
  • Taylor, T. (1998). Legacies of great economists, Chantilly: The Teaching Company. Van Daal, http://wp.unil.ch/walras/files/2011/03/8.jan-van-daal.pdf. Translating Léon Walras études. Erişim Tarihi: 02.01.2015
  • Walker, D. A. (1970). Léon Walras in the light of his correspondence and related papers. Journal of Political Economy, 78(4), 685-701.
  • Walker, D. A. (1987). Edgeworth versus Walras on the theory of tatonnement. Eastern Economic Journal, 13(2), 155-165.
  • Walker, D. A. (2005). Walras’s market models, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Walker, D. A. (2006). Walrasian economics, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Walras, L. (1954). Elements of pure economics or the theory of social wealth, (Çev. W. Jaffé). London: George Allen and Unwin Ltd.
  • Walras, L. (2005). Studies in applied economics: Theory of the production of social wealth, (Çev. J. Van Daal). Oxon: Routledge.
  • Walras, L. (2010). Studies in social economics, (Çev. J. Van Daal, D. Walker). Oxon: Routledge.
  • Yılmaz, F. (2012). İktisat, kurumsal iktisat ve iktisat sosyolojisi. Sosyoloji Konferansları, 45, 1-17.
  • Zafirovski, M. (1999). How ‘neo-classical’ is neoclassical economics? With special reference to value theory. History of Economics Review, 29, 45-69.
  • Zalewska, A. (2002). From the genealogy of mathematical economics: Walras, Pareto and Lange. Grammar and Rhetoric, 5(18), 47-55.
There are 57 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Subjects Economics
Journal Section Research Article
Authors

Hüsnü Bilir This is me

Publication Date December 1, 2017
Submission Date October 9, 2017
Published in Issue Year 2017 ICMEB17 Özel Sayısı

Cite

APA Bilir, H. (2017). LÉON WALRAS: NEOKLASİK İKTİSADIN "FİZİKO-MATEMATİKSEL" BİR BİLİM OLARAK İNŞASI. Uluslararası Yönetim İktisat Ve İşletme Dergisi, 13(13), 131-142.