Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-xtgtn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-20T00:23:44.052Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Siting the New Economic Science: The Cowles Commission's Activity Analysis Conference of June 1949

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 July 2014

Till Düppe  and
E. Roy Weintraub
Till Düppe
Affiliation:
Université du Québec à Montréal E-mail: duppe.till@uqam.ca
E. Roy Weintraub
Affiliation:
Duke University E-mail: erw@duke.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Argument

In the decades following World War II, the Cowles Commission for Research in Economics came to represent new technical standards that informed most advances in economic theory. The public emergence of this community was manifest at a conference held in June 1949 titled Activity Analysis of Production and Allocation. New ideas in optimization theory, linked to linear programming, developed from the conference's papers. The authors’ history of this event situates the Cowles Commission among the institutions of postwar science in-between National Laboratories and the supreme discipline of Cold War academia, mathematics. Although the conference created the conditions under which economics, as a discipline, would transform itself, the participants themselves had little concern for the intellectual battles that had defined prewar university economics departments. The authors argue that the conference signaled the birth of a new intellectual culture in economic science based on shared scientific norms and techniques un-interrogated by conflicting notions of the meaning of either science or economics.

Type
Research Article
Information
Science in Context , Volume 27 , Issue 3 , September 2014 , pp. 453 - 483
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Arrow, Kenneth J. 1991. “Cowles in the History of Economic Thought.” In Cowles Fiftieth Anniversary: Four Essays and an Index of Publications, edited by the Foundation, Cowles, 1–24. New Haven: The Cowles Foundation.Google Scholar
Arrow, Kenneth. J. 2008. “George Dantzig in the Development of Economic Analysis.” Discrete Optimization 5:159–167.Google Scholar
Arrow, Kenneth J. 2009. “Some Developments in Economic Theory since 1940: An Eyewitness Account.” Annual Review of Economics 1:1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Asprey, William. 1990. John von Neumann and the Origins of Modern Computing. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Augier, Mie, and March, James G.. 2011. The Roots, Rituals, and Rhetorics of Change: North American Business Schools after the Second World War. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Backhouse, 2012. “Paul Samuelson, RAND and the Cowles Commission Activity Analysis Conference, 1947–1949.” Working paper.Google Scholar
Backhouse, Roger, and Fontaine, Philippe, eds. 2010. The History of the Social Sciences since 1945. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blaug, Mark. 1999. “The Formalist Revolution or What Happened to Orthodox Economics after World War II?” In From Classical Economics to the Theory of the Firm, edited by Backhouse, Roger E. and Creedy, John. Cheltenham UK: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Bockman, Johanna. 2011. Markets in the Name of Socialism: The Left-Wing Origins of Neoliberalism. Palo Alto: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Bockman, Johanna, and Bernstein, Michael A.. 2008. “Scientific Community in a Divided World: Economists, Planning, and Research Priority during the Cold War.” Comparative Studies in Society and History 50 (3):581–613.Google Scholar
Boumans, Marcel. 2012. “Observations in a Hostile Environment: Morgenstern on the Accuracy of Economic Observations.” In History of Observations in Economics, edited by Maas, Harro and Morgan, Mary S., 110–131. Durham: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Bourbaki, Nicholas. 1949. “The Foundations of Mathematics for the Working Mathematician.” Journal of Symbolic Logic 14 (1):1–8.Google Scholar
Buck, Paul S., et al. 1945. General Education in a Free Society. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Bush, Vannever. 1945. Science, the Endless Frontier. A Report to the President. Washington: (United States) Office of Scientific Research and Development.Google Scholar
Chandler, J. 2009. “Introduction: Doctrines, Disciplines, Discourses, Departments.” Critical Inquiry 35 (4):729–746.Google Scholar
Conant, James B. 1947. On Understanding Science: An Historical Approach. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google ScholarPubMed
Corry, Leo 1992. “Nicolas Bourbaki and the Concept of Mathematical Structure.” Synthese 92:315–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cottle, Richard W. 2010. “A Brief History of the International Symposia on Mathematical Programming.” Mathematical Programming, Ser. B 125:207–233.Google Scholar
Cowles Commission for Research in Economics. 1951. “Rational Decision-Making and Economic Behavior. 19th Annual Report, July 1, 1950 – June 30, 1951.” http://cowles.econ.yale.edu/P/reports/1950-51.htm (last accessed July 16, 2013).Google Scholar
Dalmedico, Amy Dahan. 1996. “L’essor des mathématiques appliqueés aux États-Unis: L’impact de la seconde guerre mondiale.” Revue d’histoire des mathématiques 2:149–213.Google Scholar
Dalmedico, Amy Dahan. 1997. “Mathematics in the Twentieth Century.” In Science in the Twentieth Century, edited by Krige, John and Pestre, Dominique, 651–667. Amsterdam: Harward Academic.Google Scholar
Dalmedico, Amy Dahan. 2001. “An Image Conflict in Mathematics after 1945.” In Changing Images in Mathematics: From the French Revolution to the New Millenium, edited by Bottazzini, Umberto and Dalmedico, Amy D., 223–253. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Dantzig, George B. 1982. “Reminiscences about the Origins of Linear Programming.” Operations Research Letter 1 (2):43–48.Google Scholar
Debreu, Gerard. 1983. “Mathematical Economics at Cowles.” In Cowles Fiftieth Anniversary: Four Essays and an Index of Publications, edited by the Foundation, Cowles, 25–48. New Haven: The Cowles Foundation.Google Scholar
Debreu, Gerard, and Herstein, Israel N.. 1953. “Nonnegative Square Matrices.” Econometrica 21 (4):597–607.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dorfman, Robert. 1984. “The Discovery of Linear Programming.” Annals of the History of Computing 6 (3):283–295.Google Scholar
Düppe, Till. 2012. “Gerard Debreu's Secrecy: His Life in Order and Silence.” History of Political Economy 44 (3):413–449.Google Scholar
Düppe, Till, and Weintraub, E. Roy. 2014. Finding Equilibirum: Arrow, Debreu, McKenzie and the Problem of Scientific Credit. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Emmett, Ross B. 2011. “Sharpening Tools in the Workshop: The Workshop System and the Chicago School's Success.” In Building Chicago Economics: New Perspectives on the History of America's Most Powerful Economics Program, edited by Horn, Robert van, Mirowski, Philip, and Stapleford, Thomas, 93–115. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Epstein, Roy J. 1987. A History of Econometrics. Amsterdam and New York: North-Holland.Google Scholar
Erickson, Paul, Klein, Judy, Daston, Lorraine, Lemov, Rebecca, Sturm, Thomas, and Gordin, Michael. 2013. How Reason Almost Lost Its Mind: The Strange Career of Cold War Rationality. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feuer, Lewis S. 1982. “The Stages in the Social History of Jewish Professors in American Colleges and Universities.” American Jewish History 71 (4):432–465.Google Scholar
Guglielmo, Mark. 2008. “The Contribution of Economists to Military Intelligence during World War II.” Journal of Economic History 68 (1):109–150.Google Scholar
Hardy, Godfry H. [1908] 1940. A Course in Pure Mathematics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hardy, Godfrey H. [1940] 1969. A Mathematician's Apology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Herstein, Israel N., and Milnor, John. 1953. “An Axiomatic Approach to Measurable Utility.” Econometrica 21 (2):291–297.Google Scholar
Heims, Steven J. 1980. John Von Neumann and Norbert Wiener: From Mathematics to the Technologies of Life and Death. Cambridge MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Hicks, John R. 1939. Value and Capital. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hollinger, David A. 1996. Science, Jews, and Secular Culture: Studies in Mid-Twentieth Century American Intellectual History. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Van Horn, Robert, Mirowski, Phillip, and Stapleford, Thomas A., eds. 2011. Building Chicago Economics: New Perspectives on the History of America's Most Powerful Economics Program. New York and Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Israel, Giorgio, and Gasca, Ana M.. 2009. The World as a Mathematical Game: John von Neumann and Twentieth Century Science. Basel: Birkhäuser.Google Scholar
Koopmans, Tjalling C., ed. 1951a. Activity Analysis of Production and Distribution: Proceeding of a Conference. New York: John Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar
Koopmans, Tjalling C. 1951b. “Efficient Allocation of Resources.” Econometrica 19 (4):455–465.Google Scholar
Koopmans, Tjalling C. 1957. Three Essays on the State of Economic Science. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Kuhn, Harold W. 2008. “57 Years of Close Encounters with George.” http://www2.informs.org/History/dantzig/articles_kuhn.html (last accessed July 16, 2013).Google Scholar
Leggon, Cheryl B. 2001. “The Scientist as Academic.” In The American Academic Profession, edited by Graubard, Stephen R., 221–244. New Brunswick NJ: Transaction Publishers.Google Scholar
Leonard, Robert L. 2010. Von Neumann, Morgenstern, and the Creation of Game Theory: From Chess to Social Science, 1900–1960. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lipset, Seymour M., and Ladd, J. Everett Carll. 1971. “Jewish Academics in the United States: Their Achievements, Culture, and Politics.” American Jewish Yearbook 89–128.Google Scholar
Louçã, Francisco, and Terlica, Sofia. 2011. “The Fellowship of Econometrics: Selection and Diverging Views in the Province of Mathematical Economics, from the 1930s to the 1950s.” History of Political Economy 43 Supplement (1):57–85.Google Scholar
Lyman, Stanford M. 1994. “A Haven for Homeless Intellects: The New School and Its Exile Faculties.” International Journal of Politics, Culture, and Society 7 (3):493–512.Google Scholar
Machlup, Fritz. 1952. “Issues in Methodology: Introductory Remarks.” Papers and Proceedings of the Sixty-fourth Annual Meeting of the American Economic Association. American Economic Review 42(2):34.Google Scholar
Mac Lane, Saunders. 1989a. “Mathematics at the University of Chicago.” In A Century of Mathematics in America Part II, edited by Duren, Peter L., 127–154. Providence RI: American Mathematical Society.Google Scholar
Mac Lane, Saunders. 1989b. “Topology and Logic at Princeton.” A Century of Mathematics in America Part II, edited by Duren, Peter L., 217–222. Providence RI: American Mathematical Society.Google Scholar
Macrae, Norman. 1992. John von Neumann. New York: Pantheon Books.Google Scholar
Mas-Colell, Andreu, Whinston, Michael, and Green, Jerry. 1995. Microeconomc Theory. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Merton, Robert K. 1973. The Sociology of Science. Chicago, University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Mirowski, Phillip E. 2002. Machine Dreams: Economics becomes a Cyborg Science. New York and Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Mirowski, Phillip E. 2012. “The Cowles Commission as an Anti-Keynesian Stronghold.” In Microfoundations Reconsidered, edited by Duarte, Pedro G. and Lima, Gilberto T., 131–167. Cheltenham UK and Northampton MA: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Ortolano, Guy. 2009. The Two Cultures Controversy: Science, Literature and Cultural Politics in Postwar Britain. New York and Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Samuelson, Paul A. 1954. “Some Psychological Aspects of Mathematics and Economics.” Review of Economics and Statistics 36 (4):380–386.Google Scholar
Samuelson, Paul A. 2007. “MIT Infinite History Project, Interview of Paul A. Samuelson by Brian Keegan, July19, 2007.” http://mit150.mit.edu/infinite-history (last accessed February 26, 2014).Google Scholar
Samuelson, Paul. Papers. David M. Rubenstein Rare Book and Manuscript Library, Duke University.Google Scholar
Sapolsky, Harvey M. 1990. Science and the Navy: The History of the Office of Naval Research. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Scarf, Herbert E. 1995. “Tjalling Charles Koopmans, 1910–1985: A Biographical Memoir.” Washington: National Academies Press.Google Scholar
Scherer, Frederic M. 2000. “The Emigration of German-Speaking Economists after 1933.” Journal of Economic Literature 38 (3):614–626.Google Scholar
Shubik, Martin. 1992. “Game Theory at Princeton, 1949–1955: A Personal Reminiscence.” History of Political Economy 24 (Supplement):151–163.Google Scholar
Slater, Morton L. 1950. “Lagrange Multipliers Revisited.” Cowles Commission Discussion Paper, Mathematics 403.Google Scholar
Stone, Marshall H. 1961. “The Revolution in Mathematics.” American Mathematical Monthly (October):715–734.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stone, Marshall H. 1989. “Reminiscences of Mathematics at Chicago.” In A Century of Mathematics in America. Part II, edited by Duren, Peter L., 183–190. Providence RI: American Mathematical Society.Google Scholar
von Neumann, John. 1928. “Zur Theorie der Gesellschaftsspiele.” Mathematische Annalen 100:295–320.Google Scholar
von Neumann, John. 1936.“Über ein ökonomisches Gleichungssystem und eine Verallgemeinerung des Brouwerschen Fixpunksatzes.“ Pp. 73–83 in Ergebnisse eines Mathematischen Kolloquiums 1935–36, vol. 8, ed. Menger, Karl. Leipzig: Deuticke, 73–83. Trans. George Morton. 1945. “A Model of General Economic Equilibrium.” Review of Economic Studies 13(1):1–9.Google Scholar
von Neumann, John, and Morgenstern, Oskar. 1944. The Theory of Games and Economic Behavior. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
von Neumann, John. 1945. “A Model of General Economic Equilibrium.” Review of Economic Studies 13 (1):1–9.Google Scholar
Wald, Abraham. 1935. “Über die Produktionsgleichungen der ökonomischen Wertlehre (II).” In Ergebnisse eines mathematischen Kolloquiums, 1934–35, edited by Menger, Karl, 1–6. Leipzig and Vienna: Franz Deuticke.Google Scholar
Weil, Andre. 1991. The Apprenticeship of a Mathematician. Boston: Birkhäuser.Google Scholar
Weintraub, E. Roy. 1983. “The Existence of a Competitive Equilibrium: 1930–1954.” Journal of Economic Literature 21 (1):1–39.Google Scholar
Weintraub, E. Roy, ed. 1992. Toward a History of Game Theory. Durham NC: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Weintraub, E. Roy. 2002. How Economics Became a Mathematical Science. Durham NC: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Weintraub, E. Roy. 2014 (Forthcoming). “MIT's Openness to Jewish Economists.” In MIT and the Transformation of American Economics, edited by Weintraub, E. Roy. Durham NC: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Weintraub, E. Roy, and Mirowski, Phillip. 1994. “The Pure and the Applied: Bourbakism Comes to Mathematical Economics.” Science in Context 7 (2):245–272.Google Scholar