THE SCOTTISH TRADITION IN ECONOMIC THOUGHT1
| Published date | 01 February 1955 |
| Author | A. L. Macfie |
| Date | 01 February 1955 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9485.1955.tb00720.x |
SCOTTISH
JOURNAL
OF
POLITICAL
ECONOMY
JUNE
1955
THE SCOTTISH TRADITION IN ECONOMIC THOUGHT’
I
THIS
essay must start with
a
confession. In undertaking, some months
ago,
to
submit an article on some such subject as ‘The Scottish
Tradition in Econoniic Thought
’,
I
was. it
is
now clear. in a state
of
not very creditable ignorance.
1
had then
a
rather vague idea that one
could in an article say something dircctly significant on this subject.
I
had. of course, at various times read the Scots classics in
a
rather
haphazard way
;
but the effect of reading them
all
straight through
in
their proper sequence, in the hope
of
tracing the individual Scottish
thread running through them-the effect of this has been radical. For
it has forced the conviction that there
is
a quite specific doctrine and
method in Scots economic thinking, especially clear and influential
between roughly
1730
and
1870,
and still alive,
if
not
on
top.
As
it
shows some of the greatest names-Hume. Smith, the Mills-and
also
some
considerable satellites-Hutcheson, Lauderdale, Rae.
McCulloch-it
at
once appears that
a
mere article will not do. If
there is a Scottish line inspiring these great writings. then only
a
volume could do it justice. The kind
of
thesis one would like
to
examine is the view that between Hutcheson and John Stuart Mill
it
was that Scottish mode
of
approach that formed the atmosphere
of
British economic thought. But this starts many other hares, and
the most we can do here is
to
chase some
of
them conscientiously.
Our general thenie must then be that there is
a
characteristic
Scottish attitude and method which is important
in
the history
of
cconomic thought. It may
be
called the philosophical approach, though
Delivered
at
the
Annual
General
Mecling
of
the
Scottish Economic Socicty
on
241hMarch,
1955.
1
81
82
A.
L.
MACFIE
many niay prefer to call it, equally aptly, the sociological approach.
This
is riot the dominant approach today in academic teaching-the
scicntilic
or
analytical method holds that place everywhere-but in
Scotland the traditional approach is still alive and influential.
It
should then be our business to show that this Scottish method
and interpretation grew
in
a
definitely historical setting. It grew out
of
the Scottisli soil and reflected truly the Scottish atmosphere. To
cstablish this onc would need to describe at least four influences which
nourislicd
it.
First. there is the place
of
Scots social thinking in the
strcani of European culture and history. The Scots gave it their own
typical turn but their thought is in the broad Stoic stream. It was
hrought
to
its highest pitch by Hutcheson, Hume and Smith. Rather
niore speculatively,
it
was alive and dominant in the Mills. Then this
Scottish nicthod has its simple everyday reflection in the teaching
;iiid
curricula
of
the Scots universities. especially Glasgow
in
the
period between Cdrmichael and Smith, and later Edinburgh. This
LW
need
to
prove the persistence. the natural
roots
of
the method. It
lids
fornicd the sced-bed of Scots students and teaching-all
of
them
in
;111
our
Scottish universities-right back
to
link up with the Middle
Agcs.
This
in
turn reflects the character and interests
of
the Scottish
pcoplc.
and thcy again have their special contacts and friendships
wit
ti
tlie Continent. practical contacts shaping the education
of
the
peoplc
who provided the leaders in Scotland
till
after the
'45.
It
will
thcn be nccessary
to
show how this approach and method
werc
at
work
in
the classical sequence up to and including the Mills.
It
w;is
indccd working
in
Marshall. though more
as
a
climate than
as
the guiding line.
Is
this not the way
in
which his faithfulness to
11ic
classic
line.
on which he
so
insisted,
took
effect? Certainly Jevons
ivas
tlic
iiiorc typical English exact scientist. But we must not digress.
An
cqu:llly strong claimant as
a
fact is the decline
of
the philosophic
niethod from its dominant position.
or
from being a pervading
atmo-
sphcrc.
aflcr
about
1870.
Along with this we have to note the rclative
tlccliric
froni
cniinencc of Scots economic thinkers. After the Mills
no
Scot
reaches the heights
in
cconomic theory. and after Marshall
I
licrc
;ire
no
niore
'
three-deckers
'.
no comprehensive philosophic
surveys
of
economic theory. Whether this is because the Scot can be
_rrc;it
only when hc
niay
also
philosophise is
a
matter for speculation.
Tlicn
linally
one
'
lone
star'
influence that demands notice is the
fiict
of
Sniith's gcnius. Genius can have strange indirect effects.
Its
briI1i;ince
oftcn
cxtiiiguishcs other valuable, though.lesser lights.
This
is
not
tluc
to
any
lack
of
sourccs
in
Smith's
work
;
they are all there.
llut
successors
c;iiiiictt
continue on the level
of
genius. One aspect
01
To continue reading
Request your trial