Talk:The dismal science

message: According to Thomas Malthus:
:the phrase was actually coined by the historian Thomas Carlyle in reference to an anti-slavery essay written by John Stuart Mill.
Is this true, and if so, which essay? -- Beland 03:21, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not true. Mill wrote a response to Carlyle's essay, not the other way round. I'll alter the Malthus page. Paul B 11:11, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Expansion request

message: http://www.economist.com/finance/displaystory.cfm?story_id=8401269&fsrc=nwlbtwfree
I thought Carlyle first anointed economics the “dismal science” because liberal economists insisted that American slaves be free to sell their labour in the marketplace like everyone else. It was a debate on labour economics if I'm not wrong. Kendirangu 11:59, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, it just means it's another name for economics - i.e. an alternative name. It may be jarring because of the subclause inserted between "another" and "name". Paul B 14:26, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Origin of the quote 

message: Undoing a revert.   The two parties need to discuss what is intended, and I believe the use is proper.  U am, however, not a Carlysle expert.  So, the reverted might be correct.Julzes (talk) 15:07, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Paradoxical" 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on The dismal science. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101230000411/http://www.economicshelp.org/essays/the_dismal_science.html to http://www.economicshelp.org/essays/the_dismal_science.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:24, 11 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 
The result of the move request was: not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 01:36, 19 July 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: The dismal science →  – Dismal Science is how Carlyle wrote the term in the original essay. It is also how the term is given in both The Nuttall Encyclopædia and The Carlyle Encyclopedia (2004) as well as https://www.definitions.net/definition/Dismal%20Science and surely other sources. Many websites render it in lowercase (https://www.investopedia.com/terms/d/dismalscience.asp uses both), but as one of Carlyle's philosophical concepts it should rather be rendered as he conceived it. Sinopecynic (talk) 23:42, 11 July 2022 (UTC)

text: Unfortunately for your argument, the meaning which Carlyle originally intended is NOT how it's commonly understood today (see discussion above on this talk page).  Carlyle meant something or other to do with Black people in the Caribbean that I don't understand (and am not willing to devote any effort to try to understand), but hardly anyone uses it in that meaning today.  See the "Beyond Carlyle" section of the article for its most common meaning both during much of the Victorian period and certainly today. AnonMoos (talk) 01:32, 12 July 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: My argument is typographical; it has nothing to do with the meaning of the term. For example, in Nuttall (1907), where the term is capitalised, Wood writes: "The name is applied to every science that affects to dispense with the spiritual as a ruling factor in human affairs." This definition more closely approximates the modern understanding of the term, regardless of Carlyle's intent, and it is still rendered in uppercase. Likewise, the two links to modern sources that I have provided define it in the current sense while rendering in uppercase. Sinopecynic (talk) 16:32, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know if I care a lot about upper-case vs. lower-case, but I oppose removing the definite article from the article title. AnonMoos (talk) 23:38, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. The best title would be The "Dismal Science" in my opinion. Sinopecynic (talk) 23:35, 15 July 2022 (UTC)

text: The definite article in front is because there's an inherent semantic definite reference in the phrase (and not because of anything that Carlyle ever said -- the phrase was effectively hijacked from Carlyle's originally-intended meaning long ago during the 19th century).  The word "the" can be suppressed when another linguistic "determiner" word takes its place, but the bare phrase "Dismal science" without any determiner at all does not really refer to economics, but evokes Piltdown Man, Phlogiston, N-Rays, etc. etc. AnonMoos (talk) 11:37, 16 July 2022 (UTC)

text: Fixed malformed request by substituting template; please see also . Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 12:45, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 11 July 2022