2003
DOI: 10.1093/cje/27.5.723
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Smith and Newton: some methodological issues concerning general economic equilibrium theory

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
8
0

Year Published

2005
2005
2012
2012

Publication Types

Select...
5
2

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 30 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 41 publications
1
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Similar statements are put forward in D.D. Raphael and A.S. Skinner (1980, p. 12), and L. Montes (2003, p. 725). N.S.…”
Section: Smith’s and Newton’s Methods: Essential Pointssupporting
confidence: 73%
“…Similar statements are put forward in D.D. Raphael and A.S. Skinner (1980, p. 12), and L. Montes (2003, p. 725). N.S.…”
Section: Smith’s and Newton’s Methods: Essential Pointssupporting
confidence: 73%
“…The proposition that Newtonian or mechanical philosophy was Smith’s model for good science has been well challenged (Redman 1997, pp. 207–258; Montes 2003, reproduced in Montes 2004, pp. 130–164).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Ross (1995, p. 99) discusses the dating. 10 Montes (2003Montes ( , 2008 discusses the influence of Newton on Smith's methodology.…”
Section: Smith's Religious Backgroundmentioning
confidence: 99%