Talk:History of economic thought/Draft: Difference between revisions

From Citizendium
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>Larry Sanger
No edit summary
imported>Martin Baldwin-Edwards
Line 38: Line 38:
== Title ==
== Title ==
I've moved the article to [[history of modern economic thought]] from [[history of economic thought, modern]].  This is, I think, a much clearer and more felicitous phraseology--and it's consistent with our policy, moreover. --[[User:Larry Sanger|Larry Sanger]] 10:09, 24 September 2007 (CDT)
I've moved the article to [[history of modern economic thought]] from [[history of economic thought, modern]].  This is, I think, a much clearer and more felicitous phraseology--and it's consistent with our policy, moreover. --[[User:Larry Sanger|Larry Sanger]] 10:09, 24 September 2007 (CDT)
[[Massive improvements]]
This is actually beginning to look like a respectable encyclopedia article!--[[User:Martin Baldwin-Edwards|Martin Baldwin-Edwards]] 10:32, 24 September 2007 (CDT)

Revision as of 09:32, 24 September 2007


Article Checklist for "History of economic thought/Draft"
Workgroup category or categories Economics Workgroup [Categories OK]
Article status Developing article: beyond a stub, but incomplete
Underlinked article? No
Basic cleanup done? Yes
Checklist last edited by --Martin Baldwin-Edwards 19:12, 22 September 2007 (CDT)Larry Sanger 23:23, 9 April 2007 (CDT); JPRC 13:37, 28 March 2007 (CDT)

To learn how to fill out this checklist, please see CZ:The Article Checklist.






Conversion to History of Economic thought

Having eliminated material that is irrelevant to the new subject heading, I propose to develop the opening section to cover changes of scope and methodology, and make major changes elsewhere, referring to the introduction of economic statistics and the development of inductive methodologies. I propose also to say much more about Keynesianism, monetarism and welfare economics. Any other suggestions?

Nick Gardner 02:38, 24 September 2007 (CDT)

Revised opening paragraph

I have tried to avoid introducing too much economic terminology at this stage, preferring to concentrate upon the development of ideas. The reader is soon enough introduced to terms such as classical economics, Keynesian revolution etc, and there is a danger of going on too long and losing the reader's attention.

Does anyone disagree?

Nick Gardner 05:13, 24 September 2007 (CDT)

Is that right about Ricardo?

I was surprised to read that Ricardo predicted a steady state of universal misery

Can someone, more familiar than I am with Ricardo's work, please advise me whether this is accurate - and if it is, whether it is central enough to his contribution to warrant inclusion here.

Nick Gardner 05:19, 24 September 2007 (CDT)

Title

I've moved the article to history of modern economic thought from history of economic thought, modern. This is, I think, a much clearer and more felicitous phraseology--and it's consistent with our policy, moreover. --Larry Sanger 10:09, 24 September 2007 (CDT)

Massive improvements This is actually beginning to look like a respectable encyclopedia article!--Martin Baldwin-Edwards 10:32, 24 September 2007 (CDT)