Could Homo Oeconomicus Become a Revolutionary?: On the Need to Teach and Practice a Different Economics

2002 ◽  
Author(s):  
Philippe R. Deville ◽  
Christian Arnsperger
Keyword(s):  
Homo Oeconomicus

O konieczności powrotu ekonomii do swoich korzeni

2009 ◽  
pp. 3-5
Author(s):  
Jan Polowczyk
Keyword(s):  
Homo Oeconomicus

Artykuł nawiązuje do nasilającej się krytyki doktryny ekonomii głównego nurtu opierającej się na aksjomacie, że człowiek gospodarujący (homo oeconomicus) zachowuje się racjonalnie: optymalizuje decyzje, nie ulega nastrojom, nie jest chciwy itd. Konieczne jest otwarcie się ekonomii tradycyjnej na ekonomię behawioralną, która stała się w ostatnich latach jednym z najbardziej dynamicznych kierunków badań. W artykule podważono powszechne stereotypy dotyczące teorii A.Smitha, w tym przypisujący mu kreację homo oeconomicus. Biorąc pod uwagę całokształt twórczości Smitha - etyka i ekonomisty, należy stwierdzić, że egoizm i altruizm w jego teorii nie są sprzeczne. Odczytywanie ich obecnie na nowo pozwala sformułować pogląd, że A.Smith jest prekursorem ekonomii behawioralnej.

Zur Irrationalität ökonomischer Entscheidungen

2019 ◽  
Vol 48 (12) ◽  
pp. 26-32
Author(s):  
Leef H. Dierks ◽  
Sonja Tiggelbeck
Keyword(s):  
Homo Oeconomicus

Die Entscheidungsfindung folgt nicht den Postulaten neoklassischer Modelle wie jenem des Homo Oeconomicus. Moderne verhaltensökonomische Ansätze bilden das Verhalten der Wirtschaftssubjekte unter Unsicherheit deutlich realitätsnäher ab. Dies gilt insbesondere bei der Betrachtung vermeintlich begrenzt rationaler Phänomene wie z.B. dem Herdenverhalten auf Finanzmärkten, welches mittlerweile als ernstzunehmende Bedrohung für die Stabilität des weltweiten Finanzsystems wahrgenommen wird.

Los fundamentos morales y económicos de la corrupción

2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (28) ◽  
pp. 111
Author(s):  
Hugo A. Arredondo Vélez
Keyword(s):  
Homo Oeconomicus

Ante el creciente problema de la corrupción y las implicaciones morales, políticas, económicas y legales que plantea el estado de cosas actual en el mundo moderno y nuestro país, se plantea la siguiente cuestión: ¿cuál es la causa y las alternativas de solución a este problema tan extendido? ¿es posible desarraigarlo? ¿es posbile legislar los efectos positivo-destructivos de la codicia? Se proponen aquí dos hipotesis tentativas. La primera de ellas sostiene que la causa de la corrupción es la codicia; por tanto, se trata de un fenómeno estructural, es decir, cultural. La corrupción no es un problema que pertenezca a un clase, sino que atraviesa todas las capas sociales que se comportan a través de un modelo ideal i.e., el homo oeconomicus. La segunda sostiene que es posible legislar para contrarrestar la corrupción institucional con lo que denomino el ‘segundo desencantamiento del mundo’ –en el sentido de Weber– a partir de la intervención del Legislador Prudente y un modelo ideal alternaivo. De ambos planteamientos sobre los efectos de la codicia y los modelos ideales se derivan las reformas del Estado que permitirán por un lado, la acumulación de capital y, por el otro, la distribución de la riqueza social. El legislador tiene frente así una tarea ardua harto difícil: la de legislar a favor o en contra del capital.

The Price of Truth: Reciprocity, Giving, and Generosity in the Philosophy of René Descartes

2019 ◽  
Vol 29 (6) ◽  
pp. 147-170
Keyword(s):  
Moral Philosophy ◽  
Rene Descartes ◽  
Well Being ◽  
The Other ◽  
Economic Science ◽  
Homo Oeconomicus ◽  
Intellectual Activity ◽  
René Descartes ◽  
Economic Thinking ◽  
Selfish Interest

The article provides a comparison of the concept of homo œconomicus with the core theses of René Descartes’ moral philosophy. The first section draws on the work of the contemporary Western philosopher Anselm Jappe in which Descartes’ philosophy is held to be the cornerstone of the established view and current scientific definitions of homo œconomicus as the fundamental and indispensable agent of capitalistic relations. As opposed to this “common sense” position in the modern social sciences, the second section of the article builds upon Pierre Bourdieu’s Anthropologie économique (2017) to demystify the notion of homo œconomicus. The article then examines some aspects of modern philosophical anthropology that show odd traces of Descartes’ thinking and that are regularly applied in economic science as well as in the critique of economic thinking as such. These are the concepts of mutuality, giving, exchange and generosity, and they are regarded as central to the philosopher’s moral doctrine.The author concludes that the philosophical doctrine of generosity has very little in common with the bourgeois ideology of utility which implies an instrumental relationship between subjects: in Caretesian moral philosophy the Other is neither an object of influence nor a means to achieve someone’s personal goals nor a windowless monad. Generosity certainly has its economic aspects, but these do not include accumulating wealth in the bourgeois sense. It is more in the realm of the aristocratic practice of making dispensations. All throughout his life Decartes may be viewed as exhibiting a peculiar kind of nobility in which the desire to give, endow and sacrifice outweighs any selfish interest. The vigorous pursuit of well-being gives way to a quest for the leisure required to pursue intellectual activity, and care for oneself does not preclude attending to and loving the Other, whatever form it may take.

The entrepreneur of the self beyond Foucault’s neoliberal homo oeconomicus

2019 ◽  
Vol 23 (4) ◽  
pp. 493-511
Author(s):  
Tim Christiaens
Keyword(s):  
Human Capital ◽  
Michel Foucault ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Analytical Framework ◽  
Creative Industries ◽  
The Self ◽  
Austrian School ◽  
Homo Oeconomicus ◽  
Austrian School Of Economics ◽  
Joseph Schumpeter

In his lectures on neoliberalism, Michel Foucault argues that neoliberalism produces subjects as ‘entrepreneurs of themselves’. He bases this claim on Gary Becker’s conception of the utility-maximizing agent who solely acts upon cost/benefit-calculations. Not all neoliberalized subjects, however, are encouraged to maximize their utility through mere calculation. This article argues that Foucault’s description of neoliberal subjectivity obscures a non-calculative, more audacious side to neoliberal subjectivity. Precarious workers in the creative industries, for example, are encouraged not merely to rationally manage their human capital, but also to take a leap of faith to acquire unpredictable successes. It is this latter risk-loving, extra-calculative side to neoliberal subjectivity that economists usually designate as ‘entrepreneurial’. By confronting Foucault with the theories of entrepreneurship of the Austrian School of Economics, Frank Knight, and Joseph Schumpeter, the Foucauldian analytical framework is enriched. Neoliberal subjectivation is not the monolithic promotion of utility-maximizing agents, but the generation of a multiplicity of modes for entrepreneurs to relate to oneself and the market.

Humanity as Homo Culturus

2013 ◽  
Vol 30 (2) ◽  
pp. 77-102
Author(s):  
Mahmoud Dhaouadi
Keyword(s):  
Cultural Values ◽  
Theoretical Framework ◽  
Human Mind ◽  
Human Beings ◽  
Human Identity ◽  
Homo Oeconomicus ◽  
Ibn Khaldun ◽  
Collective Behaviors

This paper claims that human beings are first of all Homo Culturus and only then Homo Politicus, Homo Sociologus, or Homo Oeconomicus. Human beings are distinguished from all other species by what I call human symbols (HS), namely, language, thought, religion, knowledge/science, myths, laws, and cultural values and norms. As such, they are central to the human identity of individuals, groups, and societies and therefore basic keys for understanding and explaining individual as well as collective behaviors in human societies. The theoretical framework/paradigm of Homo Culturus also helps to explain the phenomenon of the human mind in its various forms: the illiterate mind, the educated mind, and the highly intellectual minds of scientists and scholars such as Ibn Khaldun.

Hvem er redd for Homo Oeconomicus?

Samtiden ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 118 (04) ◽  
pp. 52-65
Author(s):  
Karine Nyborg
Keyword(s):  
Homo Oeconomicus

scholarly journals Modifying the Neo-Classical Approach to Technology Adoption With Behavioral Science Models

1995 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
pp. 67-80 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gary D. Lynne
Keyword(s):  
Technology Adoption ◽  
Empirical Evidence ◽  
Utility Theory ◽  
Behavioral Science ◽  
Test Case ◽  
Classical Approach ◽  
Utility Model ◽  
Homo Oeconomicus ◽  
Science Models ◽  
Concern For Others

AbstractThe dualistic nature of humans has been recognized for centuries. The intriguing question is the extent to which the human being with her/his display of concern for others can simultaneously act as an egoist, the latter being descriptive of the homo oeconomicus rendition of the human. Multiple utility theory suggests a way to approach research on such issues. A test case of water conserving technology adoption behavior by Florida growers is examined. Empirical evidence supports moving toward an expanded version of the mono-utility or I-utility model to include a We-utility.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document