Skip to main content

Ophelimity

  • Reference work entry
  • First Online:
The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics

Abstract

Ophelimity is a term coined by Vilfredo Pareto (Cours, I) from the Greek ωϕελìμoς (beneficial) to denote ‘the attribute of a thing capable of satisfying a need or a desire, legitimate or not’. His reason, invoked by others as well (e.g., Fisher 1906), was that ‘utility’ usually opposes ‘perniciousness’ which economic value does not exclude: weapons, addictive drugs, and the like are commodities. But his action had a root in the interminable controversies that surrounded the economic significance of ‘utility’ ever since the naturalization of that term in political economy.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 6,499.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 8,499.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Bibliography

  • Allais, M. 1968. Pareto, Vilfredo: Contributions to economics. In International Encyclopedia of the social sciences, vol. 11, ed. D.L. Sills, 405. New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bentham, J. 1838–43. The works of Jeremy Bentham, 11 vols. ed. J. Bowring. New York: Russell, 1962.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, I. 1896. Review of Cours d’économie politique, Tome I, par Vilfredo Pareto, Lausanne: F. Rouge. Yale Review, November.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, I. 1906. The nature of capital and income. New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, I. 1918. Is ‘utility’ the most suitable term for the concept it is used to denote? American Economic Review 8: 335–337.

    Google Scholar 

  • Georgescu-Roegen, N. 1936. The pure theory of consumer’s behavior. Quarterly Journal of Economics 50: 545–593. Reprinted in N. Georgescu-Roegen, Analytical Economics: Issues and Problems, Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1966.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hicks, J., and R.G.D. Allen. 1934. A reconsideration of the theory of value, Part I. Economica 1: 52–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lloyd, W. 1833. A lecture on the notion of value as distinguishable not only from utility, but also from value in exchange. Reprinted in Economic history (a supplement to the Economic Journal) 1, May 1927, 169–183.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marshall, A. 1898. Principles of economics, 4th ed. New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pareto, V. 1896. Cours d’économie politique professé à l’université de Lausanne, vol. I. Lausanne: F. Rouge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pareto, V. 1909. Manuel d’économie politique. Trans. from Italian by A. Bonnet. Paris: Marcel Giard, 1909.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pareto, V. 1916. The mind and society, 4 vols, ed. A. Livingston. New York: Harcourt/Brace, 1935.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pareto, V. 1960. Lettere à Maffeo Pantaleoni: 1890–1923, 3 vols, ed. G. de Rosa. Rome: Banca Nazionale del Lavoro.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pareto, V. 1966. Oeuvres Complètes, 15 vols, ed. G. Busino. Geneva: Droz.

    Google Scholar 

  • Senior, N. 1836. An outline of the science of political economy. New York: Augustus M. Kelley, 1951.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Copyright information

© 2018 Macmillan Publishers Ltd.

About this entry

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this entry

Georgescu-Roegen, N. (2018). Ophelimity. In: The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-349-95189-5_1641

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics