The Two Movements in Economic Thought, 1700–2000: Empty Economic Boxes Revisited

2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Deirdre Nansen McCloskey
Keyword(s):  
Political Economy ◽  
Quarterly Journal ◽  
Economic Thought ◽  
The Political ◽  
Actual Measurement ◽  
Center Stage ◽  
Conception Of Man ◽  
Evolutionary Science ◽  
Political Left

Abstract My theme is of a Rise and a Fall of understanding, coming from a failure to measure ones understanding. Down to 1848 the new field of political economy was gradually coming to understand the system of market-tested betterment (lamentably called by its enemies “capitalism”). After 1848, however, more and more of the economists, as they increasingly called themselves, came gradually to misunderstand it. Indeed, the political left and the middle came to treat the theories of exchange-tested betterment with angry contempt, such as Thorstein Veblen’s blast against English economics, with its allegedly necessary assumption of the «hedonistic conception of man… of a lightning calculator of pleasures and pains, who oscillates like a homogeneous globule of desire of happiness under the impulse of stimuli» (Veblen, Thorstein. 1898. “Why Is Economics Not an Evolutionary Science?,” Quarterly Journal of Economics 12(July): 373–397). “Imperfections” in the market took center stage in economics, and the understanding that had developed during the Rise was at best forgotten, or at worst condemned as “capitalist” propaganda, so obviously false that no actual measurement of its falsity need be offered.

Essays of a “comparatively progressive” economist (On the 150th birth anniversary of Vladimir Geleznoff)

2019 ◽  
pp. 135-145
Author(s):  
Viktor A. Popov
Keyword(s):  
Economic Theory ◽  
Political Economy ◽  
Economic Thought ◽  
History Of Economic Thought ◽  
The Political ◽  
Russian History ◽  
Working Ability ◽  
Intellectual Inquiry ◽  
History Of

Deep comprehension of the advanced economic theory, the talent of lecturer enforced by the outstanding working ability forwarded Vladimir Geleznoff scarcely at the end of his thirties to prepare the publication of “The essays of the political economy” (1898). The subsequent publishing success (8 editions in Russia, the 1918­-year edition in Germany) sufficiently demonstrates that Geleznoff well succeded in meeting the intellectual inquiry of the cross­road epoch of the Russian history and by that taking the worthful place in the history of economic thought in Russia. Being an acknowledged historian of science V. Geleznoff was the first and up to now one of the few to demonstrate the worldwide community of economists the theoretically saturated view of Russian economic thought in its most fruitful period (end of XIX — first quarter of XX century).

Aristotle and the political economy of the polis

1979 ◽  
Vol 99 ◽  
pp. 57-73 ◽  
Author(s):  
Scott Meikle
Keyword(s):  
Political Economy ◽  
Economic Analysis ◽  
Market Economy ◽  
Fourth Century ◽  
Economic Thought ◽  
The Political ◽  
Process Of Change ◽  
Historical Process ◽  
Substantial Body ◽  
Moral Condemnation

Athens in the fourth century was undergoing a process of social and economic change of which a major component was the development of elements of market economy. The question to be addressed here is: what response does that historical process meet with in the work of Aristotle? I shall contend that Aristotle has a substantial body of thought, analytical in nature and intent, which is directed specifically to the analysis of that process. M. I. Finley has drawn quite the contrary conclusion, and in addition to developing my own account of Aristotle's thought 1 shall have to examine the shortcomings of Finley's. Finley takes the view that although Aristotle was aware of the process of change he simply ignored it, and that there is no trace of any analytical concern with it to be found in those sections of the Aristotelian corpus which it has been usual to regard as containing Aristotle's ‘economic’ thought, namely, NE v 5, and Pol i 8–10. Finley sees in Aristotle nothing more than moral condemnation of certain practices such as kapelike which he regarded as damaging to the koinonia of the polis.It sometimes happens that what one finds in an author depends on one's possession or lack of the equipment necessary to recognise what is there and to identify it for what it is. Finley is looking at Aristotle in order to determine the presence or absence of what he terms ‘economic analysis’.

THE POLITICAL ECONOMY OF INCLUSION: THE RISE AND FALL OF THE WORKHOUSE SYSTEM

2017 ◽  
Vol 39 (4) ◽  
pp. 453-481 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cosma Orsi
Keyword(s):  
Political Economy ◽  
David Hume ◽  
Adam Smith ◽  
Economic Thought ◽  
The Political ◽  
George Berkeley ◽  
Institutional Reforms ◽  
The Social ◽  
Policy Shift ◽  
The Rose

The aim of this article is to describe the rise and fall of the workhouse system in connection with the developments that took place in economic thought in the transition from mercantilism to the Classical tradition. By examining the economic debate about wages, efficiency, labor market, workers’ mobility, and unemployment, we discuss whether the social policy shift epitomized by institutional reforms like the Gilbert Act (1782), the Rose Act (1793), and the Speenhamland system (1795) was accompanied and eventually inspired by a change in the perception of major political economy issues. In doing so, we review the writings of Jacob Vanderlint (d. 1740), George Berkeley (1685–1753), Malachy Postlethwayt (1707?–1767), Josiah Tucker (1713–1799), David Hume (1711–1776), and Adam Smith (1723-1790), among others. Although a direct influence by these writers cannot be proven, the originality of the present work rests on the effort to put into perspective the arguments elaborated by economic thinkers and the proposals made by social reformers so as to identify possible connections between economic theorizing and social legislation.

scholarly journals Retrospectives: Hume on Money, Commerce, and the Science of Economics

2011 ◽  
Vol 25 (3) ◽  
pp. 217-230 ◽  
Author(s):  
Margaret Schabas ◽  
Carl Wennerlind
Keyword(s):  
Political Economy ◽  
Economic Development ◽  
David Hume ◽  
English Language ◽  
Adam Smith ◽  
Monetary Economics ◽  
Economic Thought ◽  
The Political ◽  
Commercial System ◽  
Political Discourses

David Hume (1711–1776) is arguably the most esteemed philosopher to have written in the English language. During his lifetime, however, Hume was as well if not better known for his contributions to political economy, particularly for the essays published as the Political Discourses (1752). Hume left his mark on the economic thought of the physiocrats, the classical economists, and the American Federalists. Adam Smith, who met Hume circa 1750, was his closest friend and interlocutor for some 25 years. Among modern economists, Hume's essays on money and trade have informed theorists of both Keynesian and Monetarist persuasions. In this essay, we begin by discussing Hume's monetary economics, and then spell out his theory of economic development, noting his qualified enthusiasm for the modern commercial system. We end with an assessment of his views on the scientific standing of economics, specifically his counterintuitive argument that economics could be epistemologically superior to physics.

J-B. Say and the Political Economy of his Time: A Quantitative Approach

1999 ◽  
Vol 21 (4) ◽  
pp. 349-368 ◽  
Author(s):  
Philippe Steiner
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Political Economy ◽  
Economic Thought ◽  
Quantitative Approach ◽  
History Of Economic Thought ◽  
The Political ◽  
The Social ◽  
History Of

Some years ago, George J. Stigler reminded the community of historians of economic thought that a great thinker of the last century, Adolphe Quetelet, had made a real methodological breakthrough in the social sciences by opening the door to quantification. Stigler himself tried to implement this method in the history of economic thought.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document