International Journal of Social Science & Economic Research
Submit Paper

Title:
REVISITING MARGINALIST CONTROVERSY IN ECONOMICS: A GENERAL OVERVIEW

Authors:
Anand Jayakrishnan K.

|| ||

Anand Jayakrishnan K.
Research Scholar, University of Kerala, India

MLA 8
Jayakrishnan K., Anand. "REVISITING MARGINALIST CONTROVERSY IN ECONOMICS: A GENERAL OVERVIEW." Int. j. of Social Science and Economic Research, vol. 3, no. 3, Mar. 2018, pp. 1026-1033, ijsser.org/more2018.php?id=73. Accessed 2018.
APA
Jayakrishnan K., A. (2018, March). REVISITING MARGINALIST CONTROVERSY IN ECONOMICS: A GENERAL OVERVIEW. Int. j. of Social Science and Economic Research, 3(3), 1026-1033. Retrieved from ijsser.org/more2018.php?id=73
Chicago
Jayakrishnan K., Anand. "REVISITING MARGINALIST CONTROVERSY IN ECONOMICS: A GENERAL OVERVIEW." Int. j. of Social Science and Economic Research 3, no. 3 (March 2018), 1026-1033. Accessed , 2018. ijsser.org/more2018.php?id=73.

References
[1]. Clark, J. (1890). The Law of Wages and Interest. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 1, 43-65. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/1009058
[2]. Clark, J. (1901). Wages and Interest as Determined by Marginal Productivity. Journal of Political Economy, 10(1), 105-109. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/1819593
[3]. Mongin, P. (1997). The Marginalist Controversy. In J. Davis, W. Hands and U. Maki Eds.). Handbook of Economic Methodology. London, Edward Elgar, 1997, p.558-562. Retrieved from https://studies2.hec.fr/jahia/webdav/site/hec/shared/sites/mongin/acces_anonyme/page%20intern et/O13.MonginMarginalistHbk97.pdf
[4]. Parker, U. (1907). The Marginal Productivity Theory of Distribution. Journal of Political Economy, 15(4), 231-237. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/1817948
[5]. Robinson, J. (1967). Marginal Productivity. Indian Economic Review, 2(1), new series, 75-84. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/29793989
[6]. Schultz, H. (1929). Marginal Productivity and the General Pricing Process. Journal of Political Economy, 37(5), 505-551. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/1821853

Abstract:
From the late nineteenth century, there occurred a gradual evolution of classical saga in economics into neoclassical approach. One of the major debates undercurrent in this evolution was regarding 'What determines price of a commodity?' .The neoclassicals argued that price of a commodity is dependent on the marginal utility of a commodity measured cardinally. Though this approach seemed simple on first hand, it changed the very outlook of how economists perceive market reactions paving the way for mathematisation of economics. Marginalist revolution eventually led to marginalist controversy in the post-world war era when economists across the world took opposite views regarding the theoretical compatibility of full cost pricing and marginalism in a series of articles published in American Economic Review. In this paper, an attempt was made to have a general overview on marginalist discourse in economic literature by tracing out the history of the debate and analyzing the various viewpoints shared by economists across the world during the discourse, along with the implications of such a controversy in modern day economics.