Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-03T01:29:46.102Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Why Were Biological Analogies in Economics “A Bad Thing”? Edith Penrose's Battles against Social Darwinism and McCarthyism

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 November 2011

Clement Levallois
Clement Levallois*
Affiliation:
Erasmus University Rotterdam
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Argument

The heuristic value of evolutionary biology for economics is still much under debate. We suggest that in addition to analytical considerations, socio-cultural values can well be at stake in this issue. To demonstrate it, we use a historical case and focus on the criticism of biological analogies in the theory of the firm formulated by economist Edith Penrose in postwar United States. We find that in addition to the analytical arguments developed in her paper, she perceived that biological analogies were suspect of a conservative bias – as in social Darwinism. We explain this perception by documenting the broader context of Edith Penrose's personal and professional evolution, from her student days at Berkeley to her defense of Owen Lattimore against McCarthyism. We conclude that in the case under study at least, science and values were certainly intertwined in accounting for her skepticism towards biological analogies – insight we develop in the conclusion about today's relationships between biology and economics.

Type
Research Article
Information
Science in Context , Volume 24 , Issue 4 , December 2011 , pp. 465 - 485
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2011

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

Alchian, Armen A. 1950. “Uncertainty, evolution and economic theory.” Journal of Political Economy 58 (3):211–221.Google Scholar
Alchian, Armen A. 1953. “Biological analogies in the theory of the firm: Comment.” American Economic Review 43 (4):600–603.Google Scholar
Aldrich, Howard E., Hodgson, Geoffrey M., Hull, David L., Knudsen, Thorbjørn, Mokyr, Joel and Vanberg, Viktor J.. 2008. “In defence of generalized Darwinism.” Journal of Evolutionary Economics 18 (5):577–596.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bannister, Robert C. 1979. Social Darwinism: Science and Myth in Anglo-American Social Thought. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.Google Scholar
Bellomy, Donald C. 1984. “Social Darwinism Revisited.” Perspectives in American History 1:1–129.Google Scholar
Best, Michael H. and Garnsey, Elisabeth. 1999. “Edith Penrose, 1914–1996.” Economic Journal 109 (453): F187–F201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Black, Max. 1962. Models and Metaphors. Ithaca NY: Cornell University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boulding, Kenneth E. 1950. A Reconstruction of Economics: New York: Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Chafe, William H. 1995. The Unfinished Journey: America Since World War II. 3rd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Cherrier, Beatrice. 2007. “The Lucky Consistency of Milton Friedman's Science and Politics, 1933–1962,” paper presented at the Conference Rethinking the Chicago School of Economics, September 14, University of Notre Dame.Google Scholar
Cherrier, Beatrice. 2008. Valeurs et Theorisation Economique chez Gunnar Myrdal, Jacob Marschak, et Milton Friedman. Nanterre: Universitée Paris X.Google Scholar
Clark, Gregory. 2007. A Farewell to Alms: A Brief Economic History of the World. Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Coben, Stanley. 1975. “The Assault on Victorianism in the Twentieth Century.” American Quarterly 27 (5):604–625.Google Scholar
Cohen, I. Bernard. 1993. “Analogy, Homology, and Metaphor in the Interactions Between the Natural Sciences and the Social Sciences, Especially Economics.” In Non-Natural Social Science: Reflecting on the Enterprise of More Heat than Light, edited by de Marchi, Neil, 7–44. Durham: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Colander, David C., and Landreth, Harry H.. 1997. The Coming of Keynesianism to America: Conversation With the Founders of Keynesian Economics. London: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Cook, Paul B. 1982. Academicians in Government from Roosevelt to Roosevelt. New York: Garland.Google Scholar
Degler, Carl N. 1991. In Search of Human Nature: The Decline and Revival of Darwinism in American Social Thought. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Dore, Ronald, and Sinha, Radha, eds. 1987. Japan and World Depression, Then and Now: Essays in Memory of E. F. Penrose. Basingstoke: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Dupre, John. 1994. “Against Scientific Imperialism.” PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association, 1994: 374–381.Google Scholar
Evans, George Heberton. 1977. Recollections of the Johns Hopkins University, 1916–1970. Baltimore: Evans.Google Scholar
Fontaine, Philippe. 2010. “Stabilizing American Society: Kenneth Boulding and the Integration of the Social Sciences, 1943–1980.” Science in Context 23 (2):221–265.Google Scholar
Foss, Nicolai J. 1998. “The competence-based approach: Veblenian ideas in the modern theory of the firm.” Cambridge Journal of Economics 22 (4):479–95.Google Scholar
Freedman, James O. 2000. “John Gilbert Winant. Brief life of an exemplary public servant: 1889–1947.” Harvard Magazine 103 (2). <http://harvardmagazine.com/2000/11/john-gilbert-winant.html>, accessed 31 May 2011.Google Scholar
Galbraith, John K. 1982. A Life in Our Times. New York: Ballantine Books.Google Scholar
Gleason, Philip. 1981. “Americans All: World War II and the Shaping of American Identity.” Review of Politics 43 (4):483–518.Google Scholar
Haynes, John Earl, and Klehr, Harvey. 1999. Venona: Decoding Soviet Espionage in America. New Haven CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Hodgson, Geoffrey M. 1993. Economics and Evolution: Bringing Life Back into Economics. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hodgson, Geoffrey M. 2002. “Darwinism in Economics: From Analogy to Ontology.” Journal of Evolutionary Economics 12 (3):259–281.Google Scholar
Hodgson, Geoffrey M. 2004. “Darwinism, Causality and the Social Sciences.” Journal of Economic Methodology 11 (2):175–194.Google Scholar
Hodgson, Geoffrey M. 2004. “Social Darwinism in Anglophone Academic Journals: A Contribution to the History of the Term.” Journal of Historical Sociology 17 (4):428–463.Google Scholar
Hodgson, Geoffrey M. 2005. “Decomposition and Growth: Biological Metaphors in Economics from the 1880s to the 1980s.” In The Evolutionary Foundations of Economics, edited by Dopfer, Kurt, 105–148. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hodgson, Geoffrey M., and Knudsen, Thorbjørn. 2006. “Dismantling Lamarckism: Why Descriptions of Socio-Economic Evolution as Lamarckian Are Misleading.” Journal of Evolutionary Economics 16 (4):343–366.Google Scholar
Hodgson, Geoffrey M., and Knudsen, Thorbjørn. 2007. “Evolutionary Theorizing beyond Lamarckism: A Reply to Richard Nelson.” Journal of Evolutionary Economics 22 (1):353–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hofstadter, Richard. [1944] 1992. Social Darwinism in American Thought. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1944. Boston: Beacon Press, 1992.Google Scholar
Jackson, John P. 2010. “Definitional Argument in Evolutionary Psychology and Cultural Anthropology.” Science in Context 23 (1):121–150.Google Scholar
Khalil, Elias L. 1998. “The Five Careers of the Biological Metaphor in Economic Theory.” Journal of Socio-Economics 2:29–52.Google Scholar
Khalil, Elias L. 2009. “Types of Metaphors and Identificational Slips in Economic Discourse.” Research in the History of Economic Thought and Methodology 18:83–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klamer, Arjo and Leonard, Thomas C.. 1994. “So What's an Economic Metaphor?” In Natural Images in Economics: Markets Read in Tooth and Claw, edited by Mirowski, Philip, 20–52. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kor, Yasemin Y. and Mahoney, Joseph T.. 2004. “Edith Penrose's (1959) Contributions to the Resource-Based View of Strategic Management.” Journal of Management Studies 41 (1):183–191.Google Scholar
Krajbich, Ian, Camerer, Colin, Ledyard, John, and Rangel, Antonio. 2009. “Using Neural Measures of Economic Value to Solve the Public Goods Free-Rider Problem.” Science 326 (5952):596–599.Google Scholar
Lagueux, Maurice. 1993. “Natural Selection and Economics.” Methodus 5 (1):93–100.Google Scholar
Lagueux, Maurice. 1998. “Rationalité et sélection naturelle en économie.” Philosophiques 25 (2):163–180.Google Scholar
Latour, Bruno and Woolgar, Steve. 1986. Laboratory Life: The Construction of Scientific Facts. 2nd ed. Beverly Hills: Sage.Google Scholar
Leonard, Thomas C. 2009. “Origins of the Myth of Social Darwinism: The Ambiguous Legacy of Richard Hofstadter's Social Darwinism in American Thought.” Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization 71 (1):37–51.Google Scholar
Levallois, Clement. 2009. “One Analogy Can Hide Another: Physics and Biology in Alchian's ‘economic Natural Selection’.” History of Political Economy 41 (1):163–181.Google Scholar
Lewis, Lionel S. 1993. The Cold War and Academic Governance: The Lattimore Case at John Hopkins. Albany NY: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Lockett, Andy, and Thompson, Steve. 2004. “Edith Penrose's Contributions to the Resource-Based View: An Alternative Perspective.” Journal of Management Studies 41 (1):193–203.Google Scholar
Lorenz, Edward C. 2001. Defining Global Justice: The History of U.S. International Labor Standards Policy. Notre Dame IN: University of Notre Dame Press.Google Scholar
Machlup, Fritz and Penrose, Edith T.. 1950. “The Patent Controversy in the Nineteenth Century.” Journal of Economic History 10 (1):1–29.Google Scholar
Marshall, Alfred. 1920. Principles of Economics: An Introductory Volume. 8th ed. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
McCloskey, Deirdre N. 1983. “The Rhetoric of Economics.” Journal of Economic Literature 21 (2):481–517.Google Scholar
Metcalfe, J. Stanley. 1988. “Evolution and Economic Change.” In Technology and Economic Progress, edited by Silberston, Aubrey, 54–85. Basingstoke: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Miscamble, Wilson D. 2007. From Roosevelt to Truman: Potsdam, Hiroshima, and the Cold War. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Mises, Margit Von. 1976. My Years with Ludwig von Mises. New York: Arlington House.Google Scholar
Morgan, Mary S. 1995. “Evolutionary Metaphors in Explanations of American Industrial Competition.” In Biology as Society, Society as Biology: Metaphors, edited by Maasen, Sabine, Mendelsohn, Everett, and Weingart, Peter, 311–337. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
Morgan, Mary S, and Rutherford, Malcolm, eds. 1998. From Interwar Pluralism to Postwar Neoclassicism. History of Political Economy Annual Supplement to volume 30. Durham: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Navasky, Victor S. 1980. Naming Names. New York: Viking Press.Google Scholar
Nelson, Richard R. 2007. “Comment on: ‘Dismantling Lamarckism: Why Descriptions of Socio-Economic Evolution as Lamarckian are Misleading,’ by Hodgson and Knudsen.” Journal of Evolutionary Economics 17 (3):349–52.Google Scholar
Newman, Robert P. 1992. Owen Lattimore and the ‘Loss’ of China: Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Parkin, Michael and King, David N.. 1992. Economics. Workingham: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
Penrose, Edith T. 1947. “Economist and Social Worker.” Survey Midmonthly 83 (8):222–223.Google Scholar
Penrose, Edith T. 1951. The Economics of the International Patent System. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press.Google Scholar
Penrose, Edith T. 1952. “Biological Analogies in the Theory of the Firm.” American Economic Review 42 (5):804–819.Google Scholar
Penrose, Edith T. 1953. “Biological Analogies in the Theory of the Firm: Rejoinder.” American Economic Review 43 (4):603–609.Google Scholar
Penrose, Edith T. 1955. “Limits to the Growth and Size of Firms.” American Economic Review 45 (2):531–543.Google Scholar
Penrose, Edith T. 1959a. The Theory of the Growth of the Firm. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Penrose, Edith T. 1959b. “The Growth of the Firm. A Case Study: The Hercules Powder Company.” Business History Review 34 (1):1–23.Google Scholar
Penrose, Edith T. [1959] 1995. The Theory of the Growth of the Firm, 3rd ed. with a new foreword by the author. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Penrose, Perran, and Pitelis, Christos. 1999. “Edith Elura Tilton Penrose: Life, Contribution and Influence.” Contributions to Political Economy 18 (1):3–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pine, Alex, Seymour, Ben, Roiser, Jonathan P., Bossaerts, Peter, Friston, Karl J., Curran, H. Valerie, and Dolan, Raymond J.. 2009. “Encoding of Marginal Utility across Time in the Human Brain.” Journal of Neuroscience 29 (30):9575–9581.Google Scholar
Rugman, Alan M. and Verbeke, Alain. 2002. “Edith Penrose's Contribution to the Resource-Based View of Strategic Management. Strategic Management Studies 23 (8):769–780.Google Scholar
Rugman, Alan M. and Verbeke, Alain. 2004. “A Final Word on Edith Penrose.” Journal of Management Studies 41:205–317.Google Scholar
Samuels, Warren J. 1977. “Ideology in Economics.” In Modern Economic Thought, edited by Roy Weintraub, E.. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Sandilands, Roger J. 1990. The Life and Political Economy of Lauchlin Currie: New Dealer, Presidential Advisor, and Development Economist. Durham NC: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Sandilands, Roger J. 2000. “Guilt by Association? Lauchlin Currie's Alleged Involvement with Washington Economists in Soviet Espionage.” History of Political Economy 32 (3):473–515.Google Scholar
Suplizio, Jean. 2006. “Evolutionary Psychology: The Academic Debate.” Science in Context 19 (2):269–93.Google Scholar
Tilton Denhardt, Edith T. 1941. “The Effect of War on the Relative Importance of Producing Centres, with Special Reference to the Textile Industry.” In Studies in War Economics 33. B. Montreal: ILO.Google Scholar
Tilton Denhardt, Edith T. 1943. Food Control in Great Britain. Vol. 35. B. Montreal: ILO.Google Scholar
Vromen, Jack J. 1995. Economic Evolution: An Enquiry into the Foundations of New Institutional Economics. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weiss, Richard. 1979. “Ethnicity and Reform: Minorities and the Ambience of the Depression Years.” Journal of American History 66 (3):566–585.Google Scholar
Witt, Ulrich. 2005. “The Evolutionary Perspective on Organizational Change and the Theory of the Firm.” In The Evolutionary Foundations of Economics, edited by Dopfer, Kurt, 339–364. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wyllie, Irvin G. 1959. “Social Darwinism and the Businessman.” Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 103 (5):629–635.Google Scholar
Young, Allyn A. 1928. “Increasing Returns and Economic Progress.” Economic Journal 38 (152):527–542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Young, Allyn A. [1929] 1999. “Big Business: How the Economic System Grows and Evolves Like a Living Organism.” In Money and Growth: Selected Papers of Allyn Abbott Young, edited by Mehrling, Perry and Sandilands, Roger J., 411–420. London: Routledge.Google Scholar