Preface.
vu
(p. 99). Yet he things it is “a principle on which we are agreed to actbut for which it might be hard to give a reason;” and again: [suchequality] “it is contended, not without hesitation is appropriate to oursubject.”
This foisting of Psychology on Economics seems to me inappropriateand vicious. Others besides Prof. Edgeworth have done it. Gossen* andJevons appeared tg regard the “calculus of Pleasure and Pain”] as partof the profundity of their theory. They doubtless saw no escape from itsuse. The result has been that “mathematics” has been blamed for “restor-ing the metaphysical entities previously discarded.”!
These writers with Cournot , § Menger,|| and Marshall! appear to me tohave contributed the most to the subject in hand. With the exceptionsnoted I have endeavored not to repeat them but to add a little to them,partly in the theory of the subject and partly in the mode of representingthat theory. Readers to whom the subject is new will find the present mem-oir exceedingly condensed. In the attempt to be brief, the'possible uses ofthe diagrams and mechanisms have been merely sketched, and elaborateexplanations and illustrations have been omitted. I have assumed 'that myreaders are already familiar with (say) Jevons, Walras , Menger orWieser where illustrations and explanations regarding “final utility”abound. Much of Part II and Appendix I may not be thoroughly intelli-gible to those not familiar with higher geometrical analysis. These partsare made as brief as possible.
My especial thanks are due to Prof. Gibbs and Prof. Newton for valu-able criticism.