Categories
Economic History Fields Harvard Suggested Reading Syllabus

Harvard. Modern Economic History Seminar. Usher, 1937-41

For the seminar “Topics in Modern Economic History” taught by Abbott Payson Usher (1883-1965) at Harvard, I have been able to find syllabi from the fall term of 1937-38 and both terms for 1938-39 and 1940-41 which, judging from the enrollment figures reported in the annual president’s report, were the only years the seminar with Usher (alone) had actually taken place. Only after the Second World War do we see a seminar with this title having student enrollment figures reported (Usher and Walt Rostow in 1947-48 and then Usher and Gerschenkron in 1948-49.

_____________________________________________

Economics 136 (formerly 22).
Seminar.
Topics in Modern Economic History

Two consecutive hours a week, to be arranged. Professor Usher.

Source: Announcement of the Courses of Instruction offered by the Faculty of Arts and Sciences during 1937—38 (First edition). Official Register of Harvard University, Vol. 34, No. 5 (March 1, 1937), p. 149.

_____________________________________________

Enrollments in the seminar:
Topics in Modern Economic History
1937/38-1940/41

1937-38.

[Economics] 136. (formerly 22). Professor Usher.—Seminar. Topics in Modern Economic History

7 Graduates. Total 7.

 

1938-39.

[Economics] 136. Professor Usher.—Seminar. Topics in Modern Economic History

9 Graduates, 1 Senior. Total 10

 

1939-40.

[not offered]

 

1940-41.

[Economics] 136. Professor Usher.—Seminar. Topics in Modern Economic History

9 Graduates, 1 Senior. Total 10

 

Source: Harvard University. Reports of the President, 1937-38, p. 86; 1938-39, p. 99; 1940-41, p. 59.

_____________________________________________

 

[Seminar.
Topics in Modern Economic History.
A. P. Usher]

 

Calendar
Economics 136
First Term

1937-38

  1. Oct. 7.     Schools of Economic Historians.
  2. Oct. 18.   Sombart and the Ideal Type Method
  3. Nov. 5.    History as a genetic science.
  4. Nov. 19.  Historical Process: evolution or fluctuation
  5. Dec. 3.    A Pluralistic Concept of Social Evolution
  6. Dec. 17.  The Historical Significance of Locational Theory.
  7. Jan. 7     Autarchy as an objective of economic policy.

Suggested Reading

  1. Gras, N. S. B. The Rise and Development of Economic History, The Economic History Review, I, pp. 12-34.
  2. Parsons, T. Capitalism in Recent German Literature, Journal of Political Economy, vol 36, pp, 641-661; vol. 37, pp. 31-51.
  3. Sée, H. Science et Philosophie de l’histoire, pp. 116-156, 228-233.
    or
    Rickert, H. Die Grenzen der naturwissenschaftlichen Begriffsbildung, 1902, pp. 1-29, 289-304; 1913, 1-29, 256-273; 1921, pp. 1-23, 215-230.
  4. Tarde, G. Social Laws, pp. 1-67.
  5. Tarde, G. Social Laws, pp, 144-213.
    or Ogburn, W. F. Social Change, 1923. pp. 56-145.
  6. Weber, Alfred. Theory of the Location of Industries.
    Hoover, E. M. Jr. Location Theory of the Shoe and Leather Industries.
  7. Heckscher, E.F. Mercantilism, I, pp. 19-44, II, pp. 13-52.

 

Source: Harvard University Archives. Syllabi, course outlines and reading lists in Economics, 1895-2003 (HUC 8522.2.1), Box 2, Folder 1937-1938.

_____________________________________________

[1938-39 Seminar:
Topics in Modern Economic History,
A. P. Usher]

Economics 136
Reading on General Seminar Topics.

I. Schools of Economic Historians.            Oct. 4.

Gras, N. S. B. The Rise and Development of Economic History, The Economic History Review, I, pp. 12-34.
Gide, C. and Rist, C. History of Economic Thought, chapters on the historical school.

II. Sombart and the Ideal Type Method. Oct. 18.

Parsons, T. Capitalism in Recent German Literature, Journal of Political Economy, vol 36, pp. 641-661; vol. 37, pp. 31-51.

III. History as a Genetic Science    Nov. 1.

Sée, H. Science et Philosophie de l’histoire, pp. 116-156, 228-233.
or
Rickert, H. Die Grenzen der naturwissenschaftlichen Begriffsbildung, ed. 1902, pp. 1-29, 289-304; ed. 1913, 1-29, 256-273; ed. 1921, pp. 1-23, 215-230.

IV. Historical Process, evolution or fluctuation? Nov. 15.

Tarde, G. Social Laws, pp. 1-67.
Sorokin, P. Social Dynamics, I, chap. IV; vol II, ch. X.

V. A Pluralistic Concept of Social Evolution.       Nov. 29.

Tarde, G. Social Laws, pp, 144-213.
or Ogburn, W. F. Social Change (1923) pp. 56-145.

VI. Autarchy as an objective of Social Policy.      Dec. 6.

Heckscher, E.F. Mercantilism, I, pp. 19-44, II, pp. 13-52.

VII. The origin and development of liberalism. Dec. 30.

Allen, J.W. A History of Political Thought in the Sixteenth Century, (11928) Part II, ch. III; Part III, ch. VIII.
Hobhouse, L.T. Liberalism. Selections at discretion

*   *   *  *   *

[“2nd Term” in pencil]
Economics 136
1938-39

A final examination will be scheduled, consisting of an essay prepared prior to the examination upon any one of the topics listed below.

No student will be responsible for more material than is presented by the titles suggested under the various topics. Relevant material will be selected from the titles listed.

1. The significance of the scientific method for economic history.

Whitehead, A. N.       The Function of Reason,
___________________          Science and the Modern World.
___________________          The Concept of Nature.
Sée, H.            Science et Philosophie de l’histoire.

2. The problem of novelty in the theory of social evolution.

Bergson, H.    Creative Evolution.
Tarde, G.        La Logique Sociale.
___________         Social Laws.
___________         L’invention considerée comme moteur de l’evolution sociale.
Usher, A. P.    A History of Mechanical Inventions.

3. Pluralism and multilinear concepts of social evolution.

James. W.       Pluralism.
Tarde, G.        Social Laws.
___________         La Logique Sociale.
Ogburn, W. F.            Social Change.

4. The Process of Innovation.

Koffka, K.       The Growth of the Mind.
Gilfillan, S.C.   The Sociology of Invention.
Rossman, J.    The Psychology of the Inventor.
Usher, A.P.     A History of Mechanical Inventions.

5. Logical Problems of the Genetic Sciences.

Baldwin, J.M. Development and Evolution.
Rickert, H.      Die Grenzen der naturwissenschaftlichen Begriffsbildung.

6. The concept of industrial evolution.

Bücher, K. Industrial Evolution

7. The Ideal Type Method and the Theory of Social Evolution

Parsons, T. Capitalism in Recent German Literature, Journal of Political Economy, vol. 36, 641-661; 37, 31-51.
Nussbaum, F.L. A History of the Economic Institutions of Modern Europe.
or
Weber, M. General Economic History.

8. Karl Marx and the Materialistic Interpretation of History.

Bober, M. Karl Marx’s Interpretation of History.
Sée, H. The Economic Interpretation of History.

9. The Concept of Capitalism as a basis for the interpretation of modern economic history.

any one of the following texts:
Hobson, J.A.    The Evolution of Modern Capitalism.
Sée, H.           Modern Capitalism.
Hammond, J. L. and Barbara. The Rise of Modern Industry.
Bober, M. Karl Marx’s Interpretation of History.

 

Source: Harvard University Archives. Syllabi, course outlines and reading lists in Economics, 1895-2003 (HUC 8522.2.1), Box 2, Folder 1938-1939.

_____________________________________________

[1940-41 Seminar:
Topics in Modern Economic History,
A. P. Usher]

Economics 136
1940 – 1941

Calendar

  1. Oct. 3.    The Development of Economic History.
  2. Oct. 17.  Werner Sombart and Max Weber as exponents of the ideal type method
  3. Oct. 31.  History as a genetic science.
  4. Nov. 14. The Nature of Historical Process.
  5. Dec. 5.    A Pluralistic Concept of Social Evolution
  6. Dec. 19.  Mercantilism.

Reading

There will be an examination at Mid-year consisting of a three hour essay prepared on some topic drawn from, or related to, the work of the general meetings of the class. Readings suggested as preparation for class discussion will not in all instances serve as an adequate basis for the examination essay. A supplementary list of books for essay topics is therefore added.

1. The Development of Economic History.

Gide, C. and Rist, C. History of Economic Thought, Book IV, Chap. I.
Ingram, J. K. History of Political Economy. ed. 1898, chapters VI, VII; ed. 1915, chapters VI, VIII.

2. Werner Sombart and Max Weber as exponents of the ideal type method

Parsons, T. Capitalism in Recent German Literature, Journal of Political Economy, vol 36, pp. 641-661; vol. 37, pp. 31-51.
Weber, General Economic History, pp. 338-370. German ed. 1924, pp. 289-315.

3. History as a genetic science.

Sée, H. Science et Philosophie de l’histoire, pp. 116-156, 228-233.
or
Rickert, H. Die Grenzen der naturwissenschaftlichen Begriffsbildung, 1902, pp. 1-29, 289-304; 1913, 1-29, 256-273; 1921, pp. 1-23, 215-230.

4. The Nature of Historical Process.

Tarde, G.        Social Laws, pp. 1-67.

5. A Pluralistic Concept of Social Evolution

Tarde, G. Social Laws, pp, 144-213.
or Ogburn, W. F. Social Change (1923) pp. 56-145.

6. Mercantilism.

Heckscher, E.F. Mercantilism, I, pp. 19-44, II, pp. 13-52.

*   *   *  *   *

[As can be seen from the date here, for the second term of 1940-41, Usher simply used his second term syllabus from 1938-1939 with a couple of penciled additions. These additions are given below in boldface within square brackets]

Economics 136
1938-39

A final examination will be scheduled, consisting of an essay prepared prior to the examination upon any one of the topics listed below.

No student will be responsible for more material than is presented by the titles suggested under the various topics. Relevant material will be selected from the titles listed.

[In many cases, any one of the titles listed will be sufficient.]

1. The significance of the scientific method for economic history.

Whitehead, A. N.       The Function of Reason,
___________________          Science and the Modern World.
___________________          The Concept of Nature.
Sée, H.            Science et Philosophie de l’histoire.

2. The problem of novelty in the theory of social evolution.

Bergson, H.    Creative Evolution.
Tarde, G.        La Logique Sociale.
___________         Social Laws.
___________         L’invention considerée comme moteur de l’evolution sociale.
Usher, A. P.    A History of Mechanical Inventions.

3. Pluralism and multilinear concepts of social evolution.

James. W.       Pluralism.
Tarde, G.        Social Laws.
___________         La Logique Sociale.
Ogburn, W. F.            Social Change.

4. The Process of Innovation.

Koffka, K.       The Growth of the Mind.
Gilfillan, S.C.   The Sociology of Invention.
Rossman, J.    The Psychology of the Inventor.
Usher, A.P.     A History of Mechanical Inventions.

5.  Logical Problems of the Genetic Sciences.

(Baldwin, J.M. Development and Evolution.
Rickert, H.      Die Grenzen der naturwissenschaftlichen Begriffsbildung.
[Haldane, R. B. The Reign of Relativity.]

6. The concept of industrial evolution.

Bücher, K. Industrial Evolution

7. The Ideal Type Method and the Theory of Social Evolution

Parsons, T. Capitalism in Recent German Literature, Journal of Political Economy, vol. 36, 641-661; 37, 31-51.
Nussbaum, F.L. A History of the Economic Institutions of Modern Europe.
or
Weber, M. General Economic History.

8. Karl Marx and the Materialistic Interpretation of History.

Bober, M. Karl Marx’s Interpretation of History.
Sée, H. The Economic Interpretation of History.

9. The Concept of Capitalism as a basis for the interpretation of modern economic history.

any one of the following texts:
Hobson, J.A.    The Evolution of Modern Capitalism.
Sée, H.               Modern Capitalism.
Hammond, J. L. and Barbara. The Rise of Modern Industry.
Bober, M.         Karl Marx’s Interpretation of History.

[10. Religion and the Rise of Capitalism

Tawney, R. H. Religion and the Rise of Capitalism.
Robertson, H. M. The Rise of Economic Individualism.]

 

Source: Harvard University Archives. Syllabi, course outlines and reading lists in Economics, 1895-2003 (HUC 8522.2.1), Box 2, Folder 1940-41.

Image Source:  Harvard Class Album 1939.

Categories
Columbia Courses Exam Questions Suggested Reading Syllabus

Columbia. Core Economic Theory. Hart, 1946-47

Up through the academic year 1945-46, Arthur F. Burns offered the first core economic theory course, Economic Analysis (Economics 153-154), in the Columbia graduate program. The following year, 1946-47, the course was taught by the visiting professor of economics (who would be offered and accepted a regular appointment that same year), Albert G. Hart. In 1947-48 Economic Analysis was given a new course number, Economics 103-104, and taught in three sections by Hart, Stigler, Vickrey.
From Hart’s materials for Economic Analysis (1946-1947), I provide below transcriptions of “Introductory Notes” along with the “Prospectus and Background” and the “Outline of Economics 153—154” that includes reading assignments from a 92 page set of typed course notes. Midterms and final semester exams have been appended to this posting.

 

Introductory Notes

Prospectus and Background

Outline of Economics 153-154

Midterm exam, ca. late November 1946

First term final examination, January 21, 1947

Midterm exam, April 14, 1947

Final examination, May 22, 1947

_____________________________

*Economics 153-154—Economic Analysis. 3 points each session. Professor Hart.

M. and W. at 10. 301 Fayerweather.

Character, uses, and limitations of received economic theory. “Equilibrium” of economic units, markets, and clusters of markets; “process analysis.” Translation of policy problems into questions of theory, and of theory problems into questions of fact.

*Designed primarily for candidates for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Economics.

 

 

Economics 159—160—Economic Theory. 3 points each session. Mr. Vickrey.

Tu. and Th. at 9. 301 Fayerweather.

A systematic course in neoclassical economics, designed to prepare students for more advanced studies. Emphasis is placed on economic theory as a tool for analyzing economic changes.

[Note that Vickrey was listed in the Bulletin of Information that announced the courses for 1946-47. From the January 1947 examination below it is clear that Stigler taught either an additional section of Economics 153 or he taught Economics 159 instead of Vickrey in the autumn 1946 term. In any event the next year found all three (Hart, Stigler and Vickrey) teaching separate sections of the new core theory course, Economics 103-104.]

 

Source.   Columbia University Bulletin of Information, 46th Series, No. 37 (August 10, 1946). History, Economics, Public Law, Sociology, and Anthropology: Courses offered by the Faculty of Political Science (Winter and Spring Sessions, 1946-1947),p. 40-41.

 

_____________________________

 

Economics 153-154
ECONOMIC ANALYSIS
Outline

A. G. Hart, October 15, 1946

Economics 153—i
ECONOMIC ANALYSIS

Introductory Notes

The attached outline is aimed to clarify the general structure of the 153-143 course. Note that the topical outline becomes increasingly vague as to reading assignments toward the latter part of the course; this will be filled in later, as I get the feel of the class’s effective reading pace and as I improve my forecast of the time-table.

 

Arrangement of Outline

By way of orientation, the topical outline has been carried clear through to May. The detailed sentence outline, however, is brought only up to the current date; “to be continued”.

The sentence outline is intended to serve as at least a partial substitute for classroom notes. It is based on the notes from which I speak in class, and aims to carry the main thread of the argument. My own experience as a graduate student was that trying to get detailed notes interfered with thinking things through in classes; and I want to put the class in a position where class notes can be somewhat sketchy. If facilities can be managed, I hope at least part of the time to be able to give out installments of the sentence outline in advance, to maximize the extent to which I can accept interruptions in class without losing the thread.

From time to time there will be written exercises, supplementary reading suggestions, etc.

 

Why This Sequence of Topics?

The organization of the material is intended to minimize the chief normal learning-difficulty of economic theory, which arises from having to carry seemingly unrelated pieces of analysis some time in separate packages before they fit together. I am trying by my first and second “approximations” to keep the various special topics continuously in perspective; to fit in each piece almost as soon as it is developed; and to avoid carrying forward excess baggage in the way of gadgets which later prove useless.

The “first and second approximations” should not be identified with either “statics and dynamics” or “perfect and imperfect competition”. In my view, the best stopping-place for a first approximation is a good way short of a full account of “statics”; in particular, it leaves out a good many institutional insights which can be handled after a fashion in “static” terms. The “second approximation”, needless to say, will stop a good deal short of a well-rounded account of “economic dynamics”—for the very good reason that a satisfactory “dynamics” is not yet worked out. As to imperfect competition, some elements of the subject go into the first approximation; and a good many, to my taste, classify as useless gadgets and go out altogether.

 

Acquaintance with Authors

It is not a primary objective of the course to acquaint students with authors. But part of the process of learning theoretical analysis is to observe the theoretical frameworks set up by a few of the masters. The reading list will give the elements of the point of view of Marshall, Keynes, Hicks, Stigler or Boulding, and one aspect of the thinking of Lange; Fisher, Knight, Pigou and J. M. Clark will be represented only by fragments, and many other important writers not at all. The foregoing constitutes a minimum list of theorists whose mark should be represented in an economist’s bookshelf.

 

____________________________________

 

PROSPECTUS AND BACKGROUND

 

I. Conceptions of the Course. I propose to treat economic theory not as an auxiliary to the economist’s work (like statistical method), but as the core of economics.

A. It is tempting to think of economics as composed of two classes of sub-fields: subject-matter fields (money, international trade, labor, etc.) relating to particular sets of institutions and their working: tools (theory, statistics, history, perhaps law).
B. Theory has a claim to be the distinctive feature by which economics can be identified.
C. In essence, theory is a systematic check list of questions: an economist is one who knows the questions.
D. The course aims at coverage (an “advanced principles”) rather than at maximum proficiency on a small number of topics.
E. I refuse to accept the view that theoretical and institutional approaches are competitive:

1. Neither type of knowledge of economics makes the other dispensable.
2. Each type of knowledge contributes to the applicability of the other.

 

II. Content of Economic Theory. Economic theory is a way of dealing with economic quantities; but it deals also with people and social groups.

A. Considering that economics purports to be a social science, it is astounding how far it turns out to operate by manipulation of abstract quantitative symbols.
B. The human side of economics comes in through the choice of hypotheses; but the central questions economics asks about people are quantitative.
C. In general, economic theory deals with choice among alternatives; with substitution of one means to an end for others; and with compromises among partially conflicting goals by maximizing something. It has to criticize goals themselves, with an eye on the degree to which goals are set to make the game interesting.
D. The quantities with which economics deals are in the first instance events (final services, productive services, transactions). “Goods” turn out to be “bundles of services”: wealth has the dimensions rate-of-service X time.

 

III. Plan of the Course. The course is planned as a “spiral” progression across a wide range of topics:

A. Its first stage is an analysis of national income and product, following Hicks.
B. Beyond that stage, analysis will run in terms of:

1. The economic unit (firm or household)
2. Markets as inter-relations of units
3. Unemployment and fluctuations
4. “Welfare economics”

C. In the second stage, these four problems will be considered in “Statics”—i.e., they are carried up to the point at which anticipations and uncertainty take on importance, but not further. The idea is to postpone refinement of analysis till after looking at the theorist’s concept of a “system of economics”.
D. In the third stage, elements of uncertainty will be brought to the surface, and the more general theoretical consequences of institutionalist insights not recognized in the second stage will be drawn.
E. In view of numbers, class meetings cannot be conducted primarily as discussions; but I shall welcome questions and argument, and hope to provide much of the benefit of discussion via written assignments and conferences. Student reliance must be largely on learning cooperatively.

IV. Economics as a Field. The field of economics deserves the best of human intelligence; and the profession is one in which its members can take pride.

A. The critical importance of economics is visible in the policy field: whether or not our society cracks up depends largely on whether a minimum of wisdom (or good luck) guides our economic policy.
B. Waiving the question whether economics is “a science”, it is a field in which it takes a great deal of mental power, and a heroic effort to correct biases, to make major contributions.
C. Economics has its weaknesses and its record of failures (though nothing like as black a record as the public may think); but its professional standards deserve respect, and its prospects seem hopeful.

 

____________________________________

 

AGH—10/9/46

OUTLINE FOR ECONOMICS 153-154

[PART I]

I. Introduction. (Sept. 30-Oct. 2: 2 hours)

Required:

Hicks and Hart, Social Framework of American Economy, Chapter 1

Suggested Supplements:

Stigler, Economics of Price, Chapter 1

 

II. The Economic Process. (National Income and Output: Oct. 7, 9, 16: 3 hours)

Required:

Hicks and Hart, Parts I and IV; over II-III lightly.

Suggested Supplements:

F. H. Knight, teaching materials reproduced from Social Science II Syllabus (Univ. of Chicago Bookstore)

[PART II]

III. The Economic Unit: schematic view

A. The Firm and Costs (Oct. 18, 23, 25, perhaps 30: 3 to 1 hours hours)

Required:

Option:
Stigler, Chapters 7-9; 1st Section of Chapter 10 or
Boulding, Economic Analysis, Chapters 22-23, followed by 21

B. The Household (perhaps October 30; Nov. 4, 6, 11, 13,18, perhaps 20: 5 to 7 hours)

Required:

Option:
Stigler, Chapter V, or Boulding, chapters 29-30,
Hicks, Value and Capital, Chapters I-II
Marshall, Book III
Hicks, Note to Chapter II; Chapter III

 

IV. Inter-Relations of Units: “Markets”, First Approximation

A. Introduction: Interplay of units; aggregation; clearing the market (Oct. 30: 1 hour)

B. Monopoly: One unit versus many. (Nov. 4, 6

Required: Cournot, Chapter V

C. Perfect Competition on inter-related markets: factor markets; “general equilibrium”. (Nov. 18, 20, 25, 27: 3-4 hours)

Required: Cournot, Chapter V

D. Monopoly: One unit versus many. (Nov. 4, 6

Required:

Stigler, Chapter 10
Cassel, Theory of Social Economy
Hicks, Value and Capital, Part II (Chapters IV-VIII)

E. Variations on a Classical Theme: monopolistic competition (Dec. 2, 4, 9, 11: 4 hours)

Required:

Stigler, Part III (Chapters 11-15) (or alternative to be assigned)

Reserve of time: December 16, 18: 2 hours.

F. Inter-temporal and inter-spacial markets. (Jan. 6, 8, 13: 3 hours)

Required:

I. Fisher, or alternative to be assigned.
[Assignment: Irving Fisher, Theory of Interest, pp. 99-149, 178-230 or Rate of Interest, pp. 117-177. If possible, also Theory of Interest,pp. 231-315 or Rate of Interest, pp. 374-415 Cf. Stigler, Ch. 17, and Boulding, Ch. 33.]

Reserve of time: January 15: 1 hour.

 

V. Welfare Economics—First Approximation: (Feb. 3, 5, 10, 12: about 4 hours)

Losses through unemployment and through inefficient use of employed resources; equalization of returns at the margin as welfare criterion; system-wide external economies; inequality and incentives; substantial identity of welfare economics for capitalist and socialist economies.

Readings: Lange on Socialism; Lerner; Robbins-Kaldor-Hicks journal discussion; Simons.

[Marshall, Principles, Book V, Ch. XIII (pp. 462-476
A.P. Lerner, Economics of Control, pp. 1-105
O. Lange, Economics of Socialism (with Lippincott and Taylor; Lange essay) or “On the Economic Theory of Socialism”, Rev. Ec. Studies, Oct. 1936, pp. 53-71, and Feb., 1937, pp. 123-142
H. C. Simons, Positive Program for Laissez-Faire
L. Robbins, “Interpersonal Comparisons”, Econ. Jour., Dec., 1938, pp. 635-641
N. Kaldor, “Welfare Propositions” Ibid., Sept., 1939, pp. 549-552
D. H. Robertson, “Wage Grumbles” in Readings in Theory of Income Distribution, pp. 221-236
]

 

VI. Unemployment Fluctuations—First Approximation (Feb. 17, 19, 21, 26: about 4 hours)

Effects of general inadequacy of demand with limited price flexibility; “propensities” to save, invest, as influenced by government budgets, foreign trade, money, etc.; basis for expecting fluctuations in demand; the prescription of “Flexibility”.

 

Readings: Keynes, Lerner, NPA, A. F. Burns

[A. P. Lerner, Economics of Control, Chapters 22-23 (pp. 271-301)
Gardiner C. Means, Monetary Theory of Employment, Chapters V-VI (mimeographs; on reserve)
National Planning Association, National Budgets for Full Employment (pamphlet, Washington, 1945)

Additional stuff if time:

J. M. Keynes, General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money, Books III-IV (pp. 89-254)
A. F. Burns, Economic Research and the Keynesian Thinking of Our Times (New York, National Bureau of Economic Research, 1946) pp. 3-29
Oscar Lange, Price Flexibility and Employment, Bloomington, Indiana, 1944

(following mentioned with regard to use of numerical Keynesian models for forecasting)

Nicholas Kaldor in Beveridge’s Full Employment in a Free Society, Smithies and Mosak in Econometrica, for critical discussion cf., the 1945-1946 volumes of American Economic Review]

 

PART III: FIRST STEPS TOWARD REALISM

VII. The Unit—Second Approximation (March 3, 5, 10, 12, 17, 19: about 6 hours)

Imperfect access to markets; anticipations and planning; uncertainty, flexibility and liquidity; qualifications to first approximation arising from fact unit is social group; “just prices”, confederations of units and price rigidity.

Readings: Knight, Hart, Keynes, Hicks, Berle and Means;_______________]

[Assignment:
Hicks, Value and Capital, Chapters IX-X; XIV-XVIII (pp. 113-140, 171-236)
Hart, Anticipations, Uncertainty and Dynamic Planning (Chicago, 1940)
Means, Monetary Theory of Employment (mimeo) Chapter V.
Ad lib., A. A. Berle and G. C. Means, Modern Corporation and Private Property]

 

VIII. Markets—Second Approximation (March 24, 26; Apr. 7, 9: about 4 hours)

Gradations of price rigidity; imperfect clearing of markets; peculiarities of markets for productive services, perishables and durables; consistency, and inconsistency of expectations and locus of surprises; unintended saving and investment; differences of opinion and speculation.

Readings: Lindahl, Hicks, Keynes;_________________________

[Assignment:
Means, Monetary Theory of Employment (mimeo), Chapter VI.
E. Lindahl, Money and Capital, pp. 21-69
Mentioned with respect to “locus of surprises”: Hart, AER, Supplement, March 1938 and Rev. Econ. Stat., May, 1937 “of a sketch by Lindahl mimeographed in 1934).]

 

IX. Unemployment and Fluctuations—Second Approximation (April 16, 18, 23, 25: about 1 hour)

Uses and limitations of “modes”; uncertainty and interest; “stagnations”; inevitability of fluctuations in major comments; the policy issues.

Readings: To be worked out.

[For details and bibliography see National Planning Association, National Budgets for Full Employment and Hart and Mosak in AER, 1945-46.]

 

X. Welfare Economics—Second Approximation (May 5, 7, 12, 14: about 4 hours)

The economists’ struggle against proposals to enable groups to “earn” more by producing less; “social justice”; economic warfare within the nation and conditions of disarmament; adaptation of economic policy to social structure; role of reason in contemporary society.

Readings: To be worked out.

Reserve of time: Nil! Whence it becomes urgent to jam V into January if possible, pushing all of IV back before Christmas. By bet is that this can’t be done, however, and that in consequence Part III (especially VIII) must be skimped.

 

____________________________________

 

ECONOMICS 153

[Undated but would fit into syllabus between Sections III and IV in November 1946]

Answer 4 questions:

1) What is Marshall’s theory of demand? In what direction has this theory been extended by modern research? What problems in demand theory deserve, in your judgment, the greatest attention in the years ahead? Why?

2) What are indifference curves? What can they contribute to the understanding of consumers’ behavior? To the understanding of producers’ behavior? To pure economic theory?

3) What does a demand curve of unitary elasticity mean? What does an average cost curve of unitary elasticity mean? Is the Marshallian demand curve equivalent to an average revenue curve, an average cost curve, or a marginal revenue curve? Why? Assuming a linear demand curve, indicate the elasticity of demand at ‘critical points’ on this curve. Will farmers benefit more from a short crop than from a bumper crop? Is there any conflict in this respect between the interests of farmers as individuals and as a class?

4)    (a) What, briefly, does the principle of diminishing return mean to Lucretius, Mill, Marshall, Stigler?

(b) Over what range of industry does ‘the’ principle of diminishing return apply? over what range of factors? over what range of output?

(c) What is ‘the’ principle of increasing return and how is it related to ‘the’ principle of diminishing return?

5) (a) Suppose that two factors of production are used in producing a certain commodity, one factor being fixed and the other variable. How much of the variable factor will a producer seeking the least-cost combination use, if the variable factor is free? If the fixed factor is free? if neither factor is free? if the price of both factors is doubled? if the price of the fixed factor is doubled while the price of the variable factor remains unchanged? Explain your answers.

(b) Suppose that both factors may be varied freely and that each costs money. How much of each factor will the producer use? Why?

(c) Same as (b), but suppose the number of factors is ten instead of two.

 

____________________________________

ECONOMICS 153-159

Composite Final Examination
January 21, 1947
306 Mines
1:10—4:00

Answer enough questions to add up to 120 “minutes”. Students in Stigler’s section must include question 1. Do not answer both 1 and 6, nor both 1 and 9.

1. (60 minutes) There are 100 each of A and B farms in a competitive economy. The product schedules of one farm are

Total Product
Number of Laborers A Farm B Farm
1 40 40
2 90 80
3 140 115
4 185 145
5 225 170
6 260 190
7 290 205
8 315 215

i. Determine wages and rents on both types of farms when there are 240 laborers.
ii. Determine wages and rents on both types of farms when there are 900 laborers.
iii. And 910 laborers, no laborer divisible.
iv. With 900 laborers, those on the A farms organize and succeed in setting a wage rate of 40.
v. And then they raise the standard rate to 47.
vi. Congress, dominated by radicals, levies a 20 per cent tax on wages. There are 900 laborers, and full competition.

 

2. (30 minutes) Explain as briefly as possible each of the following statements.

i. For a monopolist, marginal cost is greater than marginal revenue at any output at which the demand is inelastic.
ii. Demand has no influence on the price of the product of a competitive industry that uses no specialized resources.
iii. The elasticity of a straight line demand curve varies from point to point.
iv. The imposition of a license fee does not affect short-run normal price.

 

3. (30 minutes) Write a short essay on utility theory, in one of its variants, taking into account:

i. The need for “going behind” the demand curve to explain observable behavior.
ii. The empirical evidence that supports the utility theory.
iii. The uses, if any, to which the utility theory can be put.

 

4. (15 minutes) Define each of the following concepts and write a brief paragraph on its place in contemporary economic theory:

a) Opportunity cost
b) Economic rent
c) Net profit
d) Consumer’s surplus
e) Marshallian long-run
f) Quasi-rent
g) Factor of production

5. (15 minutes) Explain the difference between the “marginal utility” and “indifference curve” approaches to the theory of consumption, and evaluate the advantages attributed to the latter.

6. (30 minutes) Explain the meaning and implications of “constant returns to scale”, Under constant returns to scale, what is the relation between the amounts of the factors used, their respective marginal productivities, and the total product.
Illustrate the meaning of increasing, constant, diminishing and negative returns to one factor–amounts of other factor being held constant—within the framework of constant returns to scale. In a range where there are increasing returns to one factor, what is implied about returns to other factors?

7. (15 minutes) Give an exposition, illustrated as well as decorated by diagrams, of one of the standard special cases of monopolistic competition theory—such as (a) a price leader “holding up the umbrella” for a fringe of small “independents”; (b) product differentiation with free entry; (c) substitution of selling-cost competition for price competition; (d) cartel with enforceable output quotas but open membership; (e) spatial competition with free entry but tabu on price competition (gasoline stations with fixed per-gallon markup).

8. (15 minutes) Do the same for one other of these cases. DO NOT TREAT MORE THAN TWO ALTOGETHER.

9. (30 minutes) Suppose a perfectly competitive industry, with long-run constant costs, is in long-run equilibrium. Trace adjustment to a new short-run and long-run equilibrium when a tax per unit of output is put into effect unexpectedly but permanently.
What difference will it make if the tax is per unit of input instead (the input affected accounting for, say, ¼ the industry’s costs)?
Where the tax is per unit of output, what difference will it make if the industry is subject to long-run increasing costs?

10. (30 minutes) Suppose a household has its “income” given in kind—in a “commodity X” rather than in “money”. Draw up a diagram with “money” graphed vertically and “X” horizontally, and trace out the loci of accessible combinations of X and money (“opportunity paths” alias “budget lines”) for several different prices of X.
Assuming both X and money to be necessities (in the sense that the household will always prefer a some-of-each combination to any alternative comprising some of one and none of the other), is it possible to draw on this diagram a field of indifference curves so shaped that the points of maximum attainable satisfaction along these opportunity paths will show the household retaining more X (“supplying” less X) at higher prices than at lower prices of X? If so, draw such a field of curves; if not, show geometrically why it cannot be done.
Relate this analysis to the supply by households of agricultural commodities for which overhead costs overshadow variable costs (apples?). To the supply of labor (regarding X as leisure, of which less is retained as more time is devoted to work).

11. (15 minutes) Is the “law of diminishing returns”, construed in terms of variable proportions of inputs, a “law” of engineering, social relations, or individual psychology? (or is it strictly a parlor accomplishment for economists?) Justify your answer.

12. (30 minutes) (a) Economists generally accept a strong presumption that demand curves have a “negative slope”: i.e., that increasing a price reduces the amount demanded. What are the main pieces of evidence by which this presumption can be supported? Do you consider the evidence adequate?
(b) On the supply side, economists feel a much weaker presumption that increasing a price will increase the amount supplied, particularly where many of the suppliers have only one type of commodity (or service) to sell. What are the grounds for this difference in the strength of the presumption?

13. (30 minutes) Describe the Walrasian equations and discuss their significance in relation to the determinateness of the general equilibrium of a simple exchange economy.

14. (15 minutes) Discuss bilateral monopoly (monopolistic seller facing monopsonistic buyer) in relation to the efficiency of the bargaining and exchange process, the determinacy of the general equilibrium, and factors affecting the result.

15. (15 minutes) Distinguish between impatience and marginal time preference as a basis for interest. What other factors besides interest affect the supply of savings and capital?

16. (30 minutes) The following table shows the estimated yearly traffic over a proposed bridge at various rates of toll:

Toll Cars per year
$2.00 None
1.50 1,000,000
1.00 2,000,000
.50 3,000,000
.00 4,000,000

If the bridge can be built at an annual cost of $3,500,000 for interest, depreciation, and repairs, would it be worth while, from the point of view of the community as a whole, (a) if no toll is to be charged; (b) if a toll of $1 is to be charged, the balance of the cost coming from taxes. Can such a bridge be undertaken privately? If so, how?

If the bridge costs only $2,000,000 and a private company undertakes it, charging $1 toll, what is the net social loss as compared with operating without a toll? If the cost is $1,500,000 and the necessary toll is 50 cents? Discuss the qualifications, if any, to be attached to your conclusions. Note: Consider the demand curve to be continuous, not a series of steps; i.e., at a toll of $.10, traffic is 3,800,000, at $.20, 3,600,000, etc. Ignore wear & tear on bridge.

 

____________________________________

 

Economics 154
Hour Examination
April 14, 1947

  1. (30 minutes) Write a brief essay on “external economies and diseconomies of large scale production”, touching upon:

a) Economies external respectively to firm and to industry
b) Distinction between external economies operating via changes in production functions and via price changes
c) Effects analogous to external economies in the affairs of households
d) The Marshall-Pigou tax and subsidy proposal

  1. (20 minutes) Comment on the sense and degree in which “welfare economics” is handicapped by limitations on the “interpersonal comparison of utilities”.

 

____________________________________

 

Final Examination
Economics 151 and 160
May 22, 1947

Answer one question in each group and four questions in all.

Group I

1. Explain the following propositions:

a. If the proportion in which two factors of production are used in producing a commodity in a certain industry is not alterable, the industry’s demand for factor A will be less elastic (1) the less elastic is the demand for the commodity, (2) the smaller the proportion of total costs that factor A accounts for, and (3) the less elastic is the supply of factor B.

b. If the proportions in which the two factors are used can be altered, the demand for A will be less elastic the less easily it can be substituted for factor B.

2. What reasons are advanced by Adam Smith and J. S. Mill to explain persistent differences between the wages of labor in different occupations? Under what conditions would demand be important?

3. What deviations from the “social optimum” of welfare economics result from monopolistic competition? Discuss (a) the use of existing resources; (b) investment; (c) income distribution.

Group II

4. Explain two of the following propositions and indicate how imperfections in the loan market affect their validity.

a. To maximize their satisfaction from income, individuals borrow or lend in a volume that equates their marginal rates of time preference with the market rate of interest.
b. It pays investors to undertake all ventures in which the rate of return over cost (internal rate) is as high as the market rate of interest.
c. Current rates of interest for loans of different maturity imply specifiable expectations of rates of interest to rule in the future.

5. “For the individual, the rate of interest will determine the choice among his optional income streams (investment opportunities), but, for society as a whole, the order of cause and effect is reversed. The rate of interest will be influenced by the range of options open to choice.”

6. Which of the following statements about interest have been supported by which of the economists listed below, and which of the statements have not been supported?

a. Interest equates the supply and demand for capital.
b. Interest reflects the superiority of roundabout methods of production.
c. Interest represents the rate at which the total stock of capital in the community increases.
d. The rate of interest corresponds to the rate of decline of the marginal productivity of capital.
e. Interest is the reward for the sacrifice of liquidity.
f. Savings tend towards the point at which interest equals the marginal propensity to consume.
g. Interest arises from the exploitation of labor by capital.
h. Interest is a monopoly profit exacted by bankers through the exercise of the sovereign power to coin money.

Böhm-Bawerk, J. B. Clark, Commons, Fisher, Keynes, Marx, Nobody, Soddy, Veblen.

Explain the reasoning behind one of the statements.

7. What are the relations between the spot price of a commodity (cotton), the spot price expected to rule six months from now, and the (“futures”) price at which a contract will be entered into now for execution six months from now? Explain with allowance for uncertainty.

 

Group III

8. “…it is not the rate of interest, but the level of incomes which ensures equality between saving and investment.” Explain.

9. Expound and criticize Means’s doctrine of price rigidity as cause of unemployment.

10. Comment on F. H. Knight’s view that “in the absence of uncertainty the velocity of circulation of money would be infinite.” How far and what sense does uncertainty explain the “transactions, precautionary and speculative motives” to hold money?

 

Source: Columbia University Libraries, Manuscript Collections. Albert Gailord Hart Collection, Box 62, Folder “Sec (4) Ec 153-154 Columbia = 103-104 Micro, grads”.

Image Source:  Obituary in The Columbia Spectator, October 3, 1997.

Categories
Chicago Courses Suggested Reading Syllabus

Amherst. Honors Section of Introductory Economics. Paul H. Douglas, 1925

Paul H. Douglas left the University of Chicago to take a job at Amherst in the mid-1920s because his wife Dorothy was unable to get a job at the University of Chicago due to nepotism rules of that time and she found a job for herself at Smith College in Massachusetts. There he began his collaboration with the mathematician Charles Wiggins Cobb that resulted in the statistical fitting of the specification of the production function now named after them. See Cobb and Douglas,  “A Theory of Production”, AER 1920.

 I found the following carbon copy of the report Douglas wrote about his pedagogic experiment with an honors section of introductory economics at Amherst during the second semester of the 1924-25 academic year in the papers of the head of the economics department at the University of Chicago in 1925. Besides the reading list of supplemental reading for his honors section, Douglas includes “teaching evaluations” written by the students.

 _______________________________________

The University of Chicago
The School of Commerce and Administration

September 26, 1925

 

Professor L. C. Marshall
University of Chicago
Chicago, Illinois

Dear Professor Marshall:

I am enclosing a report of the Honors Section which I conducted in Economics I last year, which you may find of interest, even at this late date.

Faithfully yours,
[signed]
Paul H. Douglas

PHD:EPR

 

_______________________________________

Amherst, Mass.
June 18, 1925

 

Report to the President and the Instruction Committee of Amherst College on the Special Honors Section given in Economics I during the year 1924-1925.

I. Composition of Group

With the consent of the President and the Dean, the Special Honors Section was set up in Economics I immediately after New Years 1925. The first men invited to join were Messrs. W. B. Carter, Jr. [William Harrison Carter, Jr. (Class of 1926) from Woodhaven, N.Y.], Sperry Butler [Sperry Butler (Class of 1926) from Hubbard Woods, Illinois], O. R. Pilat [Oliver Ramsey Pilat (Class of 1926) from New York, N.Y.], M. O. Damon [Mason Orne Damon (Class of 1926) from Ft. Dodge, Iowa], W. J. Kyle [William Joseph Kyle, Jr. (Class of 1926) from Waynesburg, Pennsylvania], and E. S. Nole [sic. Everett Stearns Noble (Class of 1926) from Coconut Grove, Florida]; these men were all on the Dean’s List. A few weeks later Douglas Tomkins [Douglas Tomkins (Class of 1926) from Brooklyn, N.Y.] was added with the approval of the Dean. These men were excused from attending the regular class exercises and met one evening a week in the Economic Seminar room with the instructor. These sessions ranged from two to three and one-half hours in length.

 

II. Work Covered

The group read the text used by the ordinary section in the course, namely, Taussig’s Principles of Economics, 2 volumes, but the chief reading was done in additional assignments amounting on the whole to approximately one book a week. These other readings were in the main the cream of the literature on the economic topics considered. The list of supplementary reading covered was as follows:

First week Bagehot, “Lombard Street;” Kemmerer, “The A B C of the Federal Reserve System.”
Second Week Selected chapters from Mitchell, “Business Cycles.”
Third Week Fisher, “Stabilizing the Dollar;” Keynes, “A Tract on Monetary Reform.”
Fourth Week One of the following: Withers, “Money Changing;” Clare, “A B C of Foreign Exchange;” Cross, “Domestic and Foreign Exchange: Theory and Practice.”
Fifth Week Viner, “Dumping;” and discussion of text of McNary-Haugen Bill
[JPE 1922, part I, JPE 1922, part II]
Sixth Week Adam Smith, “Wealth of Nations,” Book IV, Chapter 2.
Seventh Week Taussig, “Some Aspects of the Tariff Problem” Chapter I or II, and “Tariff, Free Trade, and Reciprocity.”
Eighth Week Wolfe, “[Savers’] Surplus and the Interest Rate,” Quarterly Journal of Economics 1920; Selected Chapters from Clark, “Distribution of Wealth.”
Ninth Week Hobson, “Economics of Unemployment.
Tenth Week Ricardo. “Principles of Political Economy,” Chapter 2.
Selected Chapters from Henry George, “Progress and Poverty.
Eleventh Week Adam Smith on Differences in Wages, Book I, Chapter 10, part 1.
Twelfth Week The Basic Rate of Wages; Selected chapters from Clark, “Distribution of Wealth.”
Thirteenth Week Population—Malthus, “Essay on Principle of Population. Comparative chapters from the 1st and 2nd editions. [first edition, sixth edition]
Also one of the following: Carr-Saunders, “The Population Problem,” or J. R. Smith, “The World’s Food Resources.”
Fourteenth Week Profits—Either Hardy, “Risk and Risk Bearing,” or Knight, “Risk, Uncertainty and Profit.”
Fifteenth Week Mitchell, King and Knauth; “Incomes in the United States.” [Vol. I Summary] [Vol. II Detailed Report]
Sixteenth Week (1) Webb, “Industrial Democracy.” Chapter on “Higgling on the Market;” and (2) Fitch, “Causes of Industrial Unrest;” or Hoxie “Trade Unionism in the United States.”
Seventeenth Week Douglas, “Wages and the Family.”
Eighteenth Week Ripley, “Railway Problems, “ 1st volume; or Acworth, “Elements of Railway Economics.”
Nineteenth Week Either Haney, “Business Organization and Combination,” or Jones, “The Trust Problem.”
Twentieth Week Selected Chapters from Seligman, “Essays in Taxation.”

The members of the group seemed to read virtually all the assignments and to canvas the field thoroughly.

 

III. Personal Appraisal of Work

Personally I was very much pleased with the results of the work. The group seemed to me to cover several times as much ground as the men in the three ordinary sections of the class; and the work was much more thoroughly treated than it would have been had they been compelled to move in the lock-step of the ordinary sections. As a by-product of the work one of the men, Mr. Butler, worked out an algebraic statement of the Ricardian Theory of Distribution; to my knowledge, this has never before been done in the literature of Economics. In conjunction with Mr. Carter, he also worked out a graph of various elasticities of demand representing them on both an absolute and logarithmic scale. The group as a whole did brilliant work on the final examination which was fare more severe than that given to the rest of the class. Four men secured a grade of ninety-five or better, even with the stringent marking that I applied. Two of the men received low nineties, one of these men having been handicapped by illness. The seventh member, who was the weakest person in the group passed the final with only a grade of 78.

 

IV. Appraisal by Members of the Class

I asked the various members of the class to give me their criticisms of the work done and I am attaching those written statements.

 

Question One: Have you enjoyed meeting with the group more than you did as a member of an ordinary section? Do you think you have gained a greater knowledge of economics as a result?

“Meeting in the smaller section has been far more enjoyable than the regular class, and I believe that I have gained a greater knowledge of economics as a result. I believe that being able to talk freely with the instructor and members of a small group such as ours gives a student a chance not only to clarify himself on doubtful points, but to get the opinion of others on topics in which he is especially interested. This is impossible in the large classes, where discussion has to be conducted for the benefit of the whole section.
“Moreover, the longer classes must necessarily be retarded, by their very size, and by the fact that the class as a whole can go no faster (that is, cover no more ground) than the least capable or least industrious members. I think this is often a cause for lack of interest among the men who are able to do advanced work.”

“I have not only enjoyed meeting with the group more than the regular classes, but feel that I have derived greater benefit thereby.”

“I am very glad to have an opportunity to express myself on the matter of the honors section in Economics 1. I feel that it has been the most instructive and interesting course that I have taken at Amherst. In the first place, the group has been small enough so that each of us could have the difficulties which he encountered, explained and discussed by the remainder of the group. Then too, the group was not only small, but uniform, so that it was unnecessary for some members to be held back by other slower members, as is the case in the ordinary section. Undoubtedly we have covered more ground, and covered it more thoroughly, than we could have in the regular class.”

“My time in the honor section has been more thoroughly utilized and consequently more enjoyable than in the regular class. I feel certain that I have learned more economics, as a result.”

“The answer is emphatically yes—both in knowledge and enjoyment the honors section has far surpassed the ordinary class meeting-to this I attribute the attitude of the instructor which I think in any such course must be decisive.”

“I feel sure that as a result of the meetings with the group I have gained a much clearer and more comprehensive knowledge of Economics. This was the result partly of the discussions on the various topics and partly of a heightened interest in the course. A true interest in the subject was aroused which is impossible in the regular class meetings.”

“That I have enjoyed meeting with the group more than with the ordinary section is beyond question. Being an ardent advocate of the honors system I am delighted to find it as agreeable and valuable in practice as in theory. Before this morning (the time of the examination) I was a bit doubtful whether I actually knew more economics than if I had stayed in the regular section. While there were parts of the examination which were very complicated, I didn’t once feel that I was completely at a loss although I am aware of mistakes I may have made. As to the factual knowledge of the course I believe that probably exact definitions and the details of various parts may at this moment be better known by those in the regular division, although I would wager I have a better grasp of the fundamentals, and a clearer idea of the relation of the various factors than most of the regular members. Moreover I believe they will stick whereas the definitions and details will quickly fade from the memories of those who did not have the opportunity to tie up these principles by their application to present day conditions as we did. Therefore I feel that I know more real economics than I would have otherwise.”

 

Question Two: What is the relative amount of work which you have done in the honors section as compared with that which you did before you entered it?

“It was necessary to do more work in the honor section, for the reasons which are stated in the answer to question one. Also, there is considerable of the element of pride involved; I found that if I didn’t know a thing that others members of the section did, I was, ashamed of myself. Then, too, the honor section, with its freedom of discussion, is conducive to thinking, which is, after all, rather rare among Amherst students. More men in regular classes drop the subject as soon as they have left the class room. I believe that a little thought is particularly valuable in economics, for after the principles are grasped, a little consideration permits them to be developed and applied. I consider this “studying” of a sort more valuable than the perusal of textbooks, though the latter is essential to the former.”

“I have done considerably more reading after having been placed in the group division.”

“I have certainly done more work than I did in the regular section. Since we have not been forced to follow a fixed plan or outline of work, many interesting topics have come up which would have passed by otherwise. In general I have done the work assigned to the regular class plus reading in at least one other book. Since all the members of the group have been able to cover more work than is give, or could be given, in the ordinary section, we have been able to talk over more different books and points of view, than we could have in the regular section where the discussion, to benefit the class as a whole, must necessarily be limited by the reading capacity of the slower members. As the work has been more interesting, the extra time required has been no hardship, but has seemed to be especially remunerative.”

“I have spent from one to two additional hours a week for this section.”

“In actual time I have not done much more; but the type of work has been of a decidedly different character. Instead of rather automatic memorizing has come a feeling that this thing must be thought out independently. This sounds platitudinous, but it is true.”

“The amount of work I did in preparation for the group meetings was considerably greater than that done for the regular class meetings at the beginning of the year.”

“I have generally spent all of Monday afternoon and frequently other hours on the seminar work. This is somewhat in excess of the time needed for the regular class work.”

Question Three: As the work was given out, did it seem excessive or could more have been done conveniently?

“I could have conveniently done more work than was assigned though the hour of the section was not the best possible for me.”

“The work as assigned did not seem excessive.”

“The work did not seem excessive. Except that my schedule was unusually heavy this year, I could readily have done more.”

“The assignments seem well-proportioned. I do not think more would be advisable, however.”

“The work as assigned did at times seem excessive—at least to do thoroughly–, but this was seldom the case.”

“In general the work was not excessive usually being of an elastic nature above a certain minimum. I do not think that under our present system of college education in which every man who is at all able is expected to enter a host of student activities, I could have conveniently put in more time on the work. There were occasions when I did more and others when I did less than the average above mentioned, as the pressure of work in activities varied.”

 

Question Four: Would you favor the continuance of an honors section and if so what suggestions would you have for the improvement of the work?

“I am strongly in favor of a continuance of this system. It enables men who can and will do work that is more advanced to free themselves from the handicaps mentioned in the answer to question one. It certainly deserves a further trial, at least.”

“I am very strongly in favor of the continuance of such honor sections. We were able to pass over hurriedly some of the more elemental and obvious material, and as a result had more time for the discussion of the complex and deeper questions. A greater interest in the material discussed was aroused, with me at least, because of the removal of the drive and compulsion of the ordinary class-room.”

“I should favor strongly the continuance of an honors section, altho I realize it means much extra work for some member of the Faculty. It seems to me that such a group should not have more that eight members and that these members should not be picked before the middle of the first term. I can offer no suggestions for the improvement of the work. But I believe that this plan has not only benefitted the members of the honors section, but all the members of the ordinary section.”

“I am heartily in favor of an honors section.
“Perhaps the work might be improved by further splitting of the topics studied, allowing each student to specialize on one phase. I feel a general lack, in all my courses, of definite and exact knowledge. I think that possibly more thorough study is a limited field supplemented by well-informed discussion from several points of view would help to clarify my all too vague impressions.”

“Yes!! By all means. Caution: No more than approximately those present now should be admitted in any such section.
“The men must be genuinely interested—not those looking for escape from work—for this reason the selection of the group might well be made on the basis of the first term’s work as at present.
“I like the idea of one man leading the section each week—with a paper preferably which takes a definite stand. This ought to encourage discussion, and occasionally, controversy.”

“Yes, I would favor the continuance of such sections in Economics and other subjects also. I feel that I have derived more enjoyment and more value out of the meetings with the group than I have in any other course I have taken in college.”

“I would most certainly favor the continuance of an honors section in this,–and the introduction of the plan in other courses where the material admitted of treatment of this type. I think each group should be chosen by the professor from his regular group on the combined basis of marks, interest and ability. There are other courses in Amherst where the drag of the work due to the time necessary to explain and re-explain various fundamental phases of the work is even more noticeable than in the regular sections of the economics class. Could those who were fortunate enough to be able to go ahead without this repetition, be placed in a special section similar to our honors group, I feel sure they at least would find their college work vastly more inspiring and helpful.

“There is one suggestion I should like to make which I think might add somewhat to the value of such work. It is that any such group should carry on some definite piece of constructive investigation along the line of the course which appears most interesting to them. Each might contribute a paper or all work together under the direction of the professor on such a research. I believe it would serve to centralize much of the other work done. This might be done by the devotion of an occasional meeting to gathering together such special work at various stages in its progress. Otherwise I see very little which could be desired more than we have had this year.”

_______________________________________

From the Amherst College Catalog 1924/1925

Economics 1. Principles of economics. The present industrial system with special reference to American conditions. A study of the development of the main features of present industrial society, value and distribution and a number of modern social problems.

Elective for Juniors.

  1. Mon., Tu., Wed., 2.00, Chapel 5.
  2. Mon., Tu., 8.35, Thu., 9.30, Chapel 4.
  3. Wed., Sat., 9.30, Fri., 3.00, Chapel 5.

Professor Douglas and Mr. Taylor. [George Rogers Taylor, Ph.D., Instructor in Economics and Political Science]

_______________________________________

 

Sources:

The University of Chicago Archives. Department of Economics. Records. Box 6, Folder 7.
Amherst College Catalog 1924/25, p. 33, 81, 147ff.

 

Image Source: Amherst College. Olio 1926, p. 36.

Categories
Bibliography Exam Questions Harvard Suggested Reading

Harvard. U.S. history for economics graduate students. F. J. Turner, 1912

The object of the “general examination” for Harvard Economics Ph.D. students in 1911-1912 was “to ascertain the applicant’s attainments within a considerable range of subjects in the field of History, Political Science, or Economics.” The ordinary case would be that Ph.D. students would be “be examined in six subjects in all, chosen from the groups defined below under the respective departments of study” but not to include the subject of a student’s “special field” that would be subject to a second examination.

“Of the six subjects, at least one must be taken from each of the groups A, B, C, and D, the first three of these groups being purely economic, while the fourth, more general in character, is intended to secure a somewhat broader basis of preparation. In all cases at least one of the subjects chosen must be historical in character, either economic history under group B or one of the historical fields defined under Group D.”

Of the seven topics listed in Group D, one was the “History of American Institutions.” In 1912 the economics chairman, Professor Charles J. Bullock asked colleagues for reading lists to provide students preparing for their degree examinations.  The historian Frederick Jackson Turner responded with the following list. In the same folder there is a list of Ph. D. examination questions for U. S. history that is undated but most likely from that time as well (1912).

__________________________________

153 Brattle St
Cambridge, June 14, 1912

 

Professor C. J. Bullock,
Harvard University

 

My dear Bullock,

I suggest the following list in reply to your letter asking for books suitable for preparation for the examination of one of your graduates in Economics. I omit economic aspects in my list, as I take it these are covered by other lists.

For a general view he should read

either

A. B. Hart (ed) Epochs of Am. Hist.—3 vols.

or

Encyclopaedia Britannica, art. U. S.—history, 11th ed.

or

Cambridge Modern History, VII (U.S.)

 

He should read more extensively in standard histories. One of the following groups would seem reasonable:

A. Select ten volumes from:

E. Channing, History of U. S. (2 vols. out)

J.  Schouler,   History of U. S.

J. F. Rhodes, History of U. S.

or B. Select fifteen volumes from:

A. B. Hart (editor) Am. Nation Series, e.g. vols. 10-19, 21-25. The colonial period and the civil war could, in this case, be supplied by reading C. M. Andrews, The Colonial Period (in press, H. Holt) and F. L. Parson, The Civil War, both of the above being little books in the Home University Library. Of course it would be better to read Channing, or Osgood (Am. Colonies, 3 vols.)

 

or C. Select ten volumes of Am. Nation Series and ten volumes of the following:

American Statesmen Series:

Washington, Hamilton, Jefferson, Clay (2 vols.), Calhoun, Lincoln, Chase, Blaine; and T. Burton, John Sherman, A. Johnson, Douglas, R. G. Thwaites, D. Boone.

 

On political institutions and diplomacy:

J. Bryce, American Commonwealth (last edn)
E. Stanwood, Presidency
A. Johnston, American Politics
C. A. Beard, American Government and Politics
McClain’s or Boyd’s Cases on Constitutional Law
H.W. Rogers (editor) Constitutional History (“Michigan Law Lectures”

J. B. Moore, American Diplomacy
or J. W. Foster, Century of American Diplomacy

A.B. Hart, Foundations of American Foreign Policy
or A. C. Coolidge, U. S. as a World Power

In general I should say that the candidate should possess a good general knowledge of the narrative American History; a clear understanding of the history of political parties and issues, including the most important constitutional questions, leading cases, etc.; a firm hold on the history of the development of the significant political institutions; a good working knowledge of the main problems of our foreign relations; and a well considered and well based estimate of the work and characteristics of the leading statesmen. (Of course such economic history as lands, tariff, internal improvement, banking, and currency and finance are otherwise provided for.)

It is not unlikely that you may conclude that the above list is either too extensive or too limited for the purpose in hand. In that case use your judgment.

Sincerely yours,

[signed]

Frederick J. Turner

__________________________________

Ph. D. Examination in American History since 1789.

  1. Of what officers was Washington’s first cabinet composed? Is the cabinet provided for in the constitution? When and under what circumstances have additions been made to it? What are its powers? What books treat of its history?
  2. What are the principal periods and steps in the development of the speakership of the House of Representatives? Name and characterize the four greatest speakers. Give a list of secondary sources useful on this topic.
  3. Could a political party which held the Presidency and Congress procure a repeal of decision of the supreme court obnoxious to it, as for example the income tax decision of 1895, if the Democrats had won? How could this be done, if it could be done? On what occasions would a dominant party have been tempted to make use of such a power if it existed?
  4. What were the most important legislative policies of the following men: Henry Clay, Thomas H. Benton, John C. Calhoun?
  5. Ought Stephen A. Douglas’s biography to be included in the American Statesmen series? Why?
  6. What were the significant policies of the Democratic party 1830-1850, and who were the leaders of the party?
  7. Was the Mexican war an unjust war? What is its significance in American history? Authorities on the question.
  8. Discuss Thaddeus Stevens as an American Statesman? Was his reconstruction policy wise? How far was it put in operation? How did Lincoln’s and Johnson’s reconstruction policy differ from each other? What were the most enduring results of the legislative and constitutional enactments constituting reconstruction?
  9. Briefly explain the following leading cases: Hylton v. U.S.; Prize cases; Marbury v. Madison; Fletcher v. Peck; Cohens v. Virginia?
  10. Sketch three important incidents showing the influence of sectionalism in American history, selecting one from each of these periods: 1789-1815; 1815-1835, 1870-1896.
  11. What is the best “help” in finding “congressional documents” for the purposes of American history? What are the primary sources for debates in House and Senate 1789-1820?

 

Source: Harvard University Archives. Department of Economics, Correspondence & Papers, 1902-1950 (UAV 349.10), Box 25, Folder “Suggested Readings”.

Image Source: Harvard Album, 1916.

 

Categories
Bibliography Courses Economists Exam Questions Harvard Suggested Reading Syllabus Uncategorized

Harvard. Econ 113b. Schumpeter’s Grad Course on the History of Economics. 1940.

___________________________

Joseph Schumpeter offered this one semester, second term graduate course “History and Literature of Economics since 1776” nine times during the period 1940-1949. The core readings were basically unchanged. Below you will find the course enrollment figures and the reading list for 1940 (into which I have inserted the two additions from the reading list for 1941). Exam questions from 1940 and 1941 are included as well as an important research tip at the bottom of the posting. Nobel Laureates James Tobin and Robert Solow took this course in 1940 and 1947, respectively. I have gone to the trouble of providing links to almost the entire reading list as a public service to the history of economics community of scholars.

The (much reduced) reading list for the last time Schumpeter taught the course, Spring 1949 is transcribed in a later post.

___________________________

If you find this posting interesting, here is the complete list of “artifacts” from the history of economics I have assembled. You can subscribe to Economics in the Rear-View Mirror below. There is also an opportunity for comment following each posting….

___________________________

[Course Description: History and Literature of Economics since 1776]

Course work will mainly consist in critical study of the leading English, French, German and Italian contributions to economic thought in the nineteenth century. An introductory and a concluding series of lectures and discussions will provide the links with earlier and modern developments. Undergraduates who have passed Ec A are admitted without individual permission

Source: Joseph Schumpeter Papers, Harvard University Archives, HUG (FP) 4.62. Box 10 “Lecture Notes”, Folder “Ec 113, 1941”.

___________________________

Course Enrollment Statistics:

Grad. Students Seniors Juniors Radcliffe Other Total
1939-40 9 3 1 0 3 16
1940-41 11 2 0 3 1 17
1941-42 5 1 0 4 1 12
1942-43 10 3 0 6 3 22
1943-44 2 1 0 3 3 9
1944-45 Not offered
1945-46 18 2 5 25
1946-47 21 1 0 6 7 35
1947-48 17 4 0 2 7 30
1948-49 2 1 0 0 1 4

Note: The course number was Economics 113b until the academic year 1947-48, under the new course numbering system in 1948-49, it became Economics 213b. Joseph Schumpeter died in January 1950.

Source: Harvard/Radcliffe Online Historical Reference Shelf. Harvard President’s Reports.

___________________________

Economics 113b
[History and Literature of Economics since 1776]
1939-40
[second term]

 

I. For general reference you should currently consult:

Erich Roll, A History of Economic Thought (1939, [link to 1945 edition]), or
L. H. Haney, History of Economic Thought (1927).[1923 revised edition]

Suggestions:

John M. Keynes, Essays in Biography (Essays on Malthus, Marshall and Edgeworth).

 

II. Works dealing with the history of individual doctrines or problems. No assignment.

Suggestions:

E. Boehm-Bawerk, Capital and Interest, Vol. I.
E. Cannan, Theories of Production and Distribution (1924). [2nd ed., 1903]
F. W. Taussig, Wages and Capital (1896).
J. Viner, Studies in the Theory of International Trade (1937), Chs. I and II.
K. Marx, Theorien über den Mehrwehrt (1921). [1910 edition by Karl Kautsky: vol I, vol. II(1), vol. II(2), vol. III.]

 

III. This course covers many authors whose teaching is also dealt with in other courses and whose works are more or less familiar to every student. The most important of them are:

Adam Smith, Wealth of Nations, also read the introduction to Cannan’s edition.
David Ricardo, Principles of Political Economy.
John Stuart Mill, Principles of Political Economy; also read introduction to Ashley’s edition.
Alfred Marshall, Principles of Economics, particularly Book V.
John B. Clark, Distribution of Wealth (1899).

Suggestions:

Augustin Cournot, Principles of the Theory of Wealth (Fisher’s edition, 1927).
Léon Walras, Element d’économie pure (edition definitive, 1926).
Knut Wicksell, Lectures on Political Economy (Robbins’ edition, 1934). [volume I, volume II]

 

IV. In addition, the following books should be read, at least cursorily:

Richard Cantillon, Essai sur la nature du commerce en général (1755); English translation by Higgs (1931).
David Hume, Political Discourses (edition by Green and Grose, 1875), Vol. I. [Miller edition]
Sir James Steuart, Principles of Political Economy (1767). [Vol I (1767); Vol II ]
A. R. J. Turgot, Réflexions sur la Formation et la Distribution des Richesses (1766), (Oeuvres, ed. Daire, 1844). Vol I; Vol II.
Thomas R. Malthus, Essay on the Principle of Population (1798). [1803 edition, enlarged]
Jean B. Say, Traité d’économie politique (1803). [2nd ed. 1814] [1855 English translation from 4th and 5th editions]
William N. Senior, Outline of the Science of Political Economy (1836).
William St. Jevons, Theory of Political Economy (1871).
J. E. Cairnes, Leading Principles.
Karl Marx, first volume of Das Kapital (English translation).

Suggestions:

J. H. v. Thünen, Der isolierte Staat (ed. Waentig, 1930).
R. Auspitz und R. Lieben, Untersuchungen über die Theorie des Preises (1888), (also translation into French). [Vol. I (French); Vol. II (French)]
Carl Menger, Grundsätze der Volkswirtschaftslehre (London School reprints, 1934). [English translation with introduction by F. A. Hayek]
F. Y. Edgeworth, Mathematical Psychics (London School reprints, 1932).
M. Longfield, Lectures on Political Economy (London School reprints, 1931).
H. C. Carey, The Past, the Present and the Future (1848).
H. George, Progress and Poverty (1879).
S. Newcomb, Principles of Political Economy (1885).
Ph. Wicksteed, The Commonsense of Political Economy (1908).

 

V. Monographs on individual authors. No assignments.

Suggestions:

[Addition to list in 1940-41: Henry Higgs, The Physiocrats (1897)]
W. R. Scott, Adam Smith as Student and Professor (1937).
J. Rae, Life of Adam Smith (1895).
J. Bonar, Malthus and his Work (1924). [1885 ed.]
M. Bowley, Nassau Senior and Classical Economics (1937).
F. Mehring, Karl Marx (1936).
J. R. Hicks, Leon Walras (Econometrica, 1934).
[Addition to list in 1940-41: H. W. Jevons and H. S. Jevons, “William S. Jevons,” Econometrica]

Source: Syllabi, course outlines and reading lists in Economics, 1895-2003. Harvard University Archives, HUC 8522.2.1. Box 2, Folder “1939-40, 2 of (2)” and Folder “1940-41”.

___________________________

1939-1940
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
ECONOMICS 113b2

Answer any FOUR out of the following five questions:

  1. Discuss the wage-fund theory and its practical implications. In what sense was it resuscitated by Boehm-Bawerk and Taussig?
  2. Exponents of the Labor-Quantity theory of value and exponents of the Marginal Utility theory of value have for decades tried to refute each other. What is the true relation between the two theories?
  3. State and criticize the Marxian theory of Surplus Value or of Exploitation.
  4. What do you think of the so-called Ricardian theory of rent?
  5. What are the main objections that were raised against the “Austrian school” during the early stages of its development?

Final. 1940

 

Source: Joseph Schumpeter Papers, Harvard University Archives, HUG (FP) 4.62. Box 10 “Lecture Notes”, Folder “Ec 113, 1941”.

___________________________

1940-1941
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
ECONOMICS 113b2

One question may be omitted. Arrange your answers in the order of the questions.

  1. If a layman, trying to make intellectual conversation, asked you what Adam Smith’s performance consisted in, what would you say?
  2. What was the importance, for the economic theory of its time, of Malthus’ Essay on Population?
  3. Explain the meaning and use of the theorem usually referred to as Say’s Law.
  4. What are the conditions that would have to be fulfilled in order to make the labor-quantity theory of value true?
  5. State and discuss Ricardo’s version of the so-called law of the falling rate of profit.
  6. Jevons, Walras and Menger no doubt felt that they had revolutionized economic theory. What did this revolution consist in and how important do you think it was?
  7. Under modern conditions, most producers have no use for any significant part of their products. Hence their subjective valuation of these products depends on what these products will exchange for, that is to say, on their prices. How, then, can we derive these prices from utility schedules of buyers and sellers without reasoning in a circle?

Final. 1941.

Source: Joseph Schumpeter Papers, Harvard University Archives, HUG (FP) 4.62. Box 10 “Lecture Notes”, Folder “Ec 113, 1941”.

___________________________

Research Tip: 75 pages of student notes taken by future Nobel Laureate James Tobin for Economics 113b2 of the 1939-40 academic year are available in the James Tobin Papers at the Yale University Library Manuscripts Collection, Group No. 1746, Box. No. 6 in one of the hard-bound volumes of Tobin’s notes from his Harvard courses.

Image SourceHarvard Album, 1943.

Categories
Economists Suggested Reading

Suggested reading: European emigrés and American Economics. Hagemann. 2011

Harald Hagemann (2011): European émigrés and the ‘Americanization’ of economics, The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, 18:5, 643-671

Abstract

The development of economics since 1945 was marked by an increasing internationalization that was simultaneously in large part a process of Americanization. This article focuses on the role refugee economists from Continental Europe played in the rise of American economics. It focuses on the emigration of German-speaking economists after 1933; and then deals with the special case of Jacob Marschak who emigrated twice, first from the Soviet Union in 1919 and then from Nazi Germany, and exerted a greater influence in Britain and in the USA. Finally important contributions by émigré economists to game theory, public finance and development economics are reflected.