, Folder 2, IEA Records. The review of The Gift Relationship Folder 2; and William Scott to the Members of the Committee Folder 2; and Seldon to A, 43 Howard to Kemp IEA Records. Anthony Culyer had just finished writing, pp.1649-602, 1971.
, Gordon Tullock to Seldon, IEA Records. 46 Armen A. Alchian and William R. Allen, 1964.
, The Economics of Charity Seldon probably discussed the inclusion of Tullock's essay in the philanthropy volume at the Mont Pèlerin Conference held at Rockford between 8 and 12, Tullock to Seldon Seldon to Culyer, 29 Oct Seldon to James M. Stengle, 15 Sept. 1971, and Seldon to Culyer, pp.379-392, 1970.
, 57 CONCLUSION With its repeated allusions to moral values and altruism, Titmuss's work disconcerted economists. Thus, when Titmuss became a vocal critic of economic man in the early 1960s, he was greeted with a skepticism verging on open hostility At the LSE, his ethics-related view of economic questions never really captured the attention of economists. 58 Developed in the 1930s and still recognized thirty years later, the view of the relations (or lack thereof ) between economics and ethics espoused by Lionel Robbins did not seem in tune with Titmuss's emphasis on the role of ethical considerations in social science Outside the LSE, except among economists interested in social policy or unselfish behavior, Titmuss's taste for ethical matters aroused no more enthusiasm. True, once such highly respected economic theorists as Solow and Arrow had read The Gift Relationship and studied its thesis at length, it became more difficult for economists to dismiss Titmuss's emphasis on the role of gift-giving in the workings of society as mere softheartedness. Suggesting wide inferences for the study of human behavior and far-reaching implications for public policy, Titmuss's effort revealed mainstream economists' blind spots with regard to the influence of moral norms on economic outcomes and the role of moral commitments in policy making. It remained that most economists (and other social scientists) were largely unprepared for the message of The Gift Relationship. 59 Yet as AIDS came to the fore in public debates in the early 1980s, new perspectives opened up for Titmuss's arguments. As a manifestation of his belief in ethical socialism and his contempt for commercialism, Titmuss's dichotomy between, on the one hand, donated, and therefore good, blood and, on the other, sold, and therefore bad, blood proved its power as much as its limits. Clearly there was little incentive for voluntary donors to give bad blood. Yet as the story of AIDS quickly demonstrated, the positive effects ex- 57 Quoted in Richard Swedberg Introduction to the Transaction Edition The Political Element in the Development of Economic Theory Gowing notes that " some economists, for example James Meade, appreciated very well Titmuss's ability to re-examine economists' theories and assumptions, " while " others undoubtedly regarded him as a do-gooder out of touch with economic realities 59 Judging from later developments at the intersection of moral philosophy and economic analysis, it seems that the book has had little influence on economists even if it has occasionally been cited as an illustration of the economic significance of ethical variables, of the Conservative Party and was soon to implement the " theories of private social policy " that Titmuss had indefatigably criticized. Some would find it ironic, however, that Hayek had to share the award with Gunnar Myrdal?an old friend of Titmuss and the author of The Political Element in the Development of Economic Theory Gunnar Myrdal pp. vii?xxxvii, on p. vii. 58 For instance, unlike the Economic Journal and the Journal of Public Economics, the LSE-based journal Economica did not review The Gift Relationship. However Labor Contracts as Partial Gift Exchange bonne e ´conomie: La réciprocité générale, pp.419543-569, 1982.
, Against Parsimony: Three Easy Ways of Complicating Some Categories of Economic Discourse Taking Ethics Seriously: Economics and Contemporary Moral Philosophy Citing The Gift Relationship as an illustration of the position against commodification in a recent book review, Arrow notes that his view of the book was more skeptical when he wrote his review article: Kenneth Arrow, Economics and Philosophy J. Econ. Lit. Invaluable Goods, vol.1, issue.35, pp.7-21, 1985.