On John Bates Clark's “Naive Productivity Ethics”: A Note
详细考察了美国经济学家对约翰·贝茨·克拉克关于边际生产力分配必然公正这一争议性观点的反应，发现该观点在当时引发了远超学科内部界限的广泛争论，而非如传统历史叙述所言具有整合作用。
Abstract This article explores in detail the reactions among American economists to John Bates Clark's famously controversial claim that the marginal productivity theory of factor pricing and distribution is necessarily just. The general debate around Clark's “naïve productivity ethics,” as George Stigler sharply called it, transcended the then existing distinctions within the discipline and involved figures of virtually all theoretical and ideological persuasions—from prolabor progressives such as Richard T. Ely to staunch conservatives such as Thomas Nixon Carver. Our reconstruction reveals that, contrary to several standard historical accounts, for American early twentieth-century marginalism, let alone American economics at large, Clark's solution to the ethical problem of distributive justice was far more divisive than consolidating.