The Experts below are selected from a list of 14475 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Dieter Bögenhold - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Schumpeter’s Split Between “Pure” Economics and Institutional Economics: Why Methodological Individualism Was Not Fully Considered
International Advances in Economic Research, 2018Co-Authors: Dieter BögenholdAbstract:Abstract While Joseph A. Schumpeter is classified as a pioneer of evolutionary economics in a wide sense and of entrepreneurship and innovation management in a narrower sense, Schumpeter is less known for his contributions in the area of scientific methodology and history of science. The paper deals with methodological premises in Schumpeter’s scientific positioning. In 1908, in his Das Wesen und der Hauptinhalt der theoretischen Nationalokonomie, Schumpeter developed and pioneered his methodological individualism which is very much acknowledged. However, comparing these early positions with methodological writings in his History of Economic Analysis (1954) shows that he has not really shifted from methodological individualism to an institutional perspective that addresses the academic interplay and sees economic action rooted in historical predispositions, paths and social constraints.
-
Schumpeter’s Split Between “Pure” Economics and Institutional Economics: Why Methodological Individualism Was Not Fully Considered
International Advances in Economic Research, 2018Co-Authors: Dieter BögenholdAbstract:While Joseph A. Schumpeter is classified as a pioneer of evolutionary economics in a wide sense and of entrepreneurship and innovation management in a narrower sense, Schumpeter is less known for his contributions in the area of scientific methodology and history of science. The paper deals with methodological premises in Schumpeter’s scientific positioning. In 1908, in his Das Wesen und der Hauptinhalt der theoretischen Nationalökonomie , Schumpeter developed and pioneered his methodological individualism which is very much acknowledged. However, comparing these early positions with methodological writings in his History of Economic Analysis (1954) shows that he has not really shifted from methodological individualism to an institutional perspective that addresses the academic interplay and sees economic action rooted in historical predispositions, paths and social constraints.
-
Schumpeter s split between pure economics and institutional economics why methodological individualism was not fully considered
International Advances in Economic Research, 2018Co-Authors: Dieter BögenholdAbstract:Abstract While Joseph A. Schumpeter is classified as a pioneer of evolutionary economics in a wide sense and of entrepreneurship and innovation management in a narrower sense, Schumpeter is less known for his contributions in the area of scientific methodology and history of science. The paper deals with methodological premises in Schumpeter’s scientific positioning. In 1908, in his Das Wesen und der Hauptinhalt der theoretischen Nationalokonomie, Schumpeter developed and pioneered his methodological individualism which is very much acknowledged. However, comparing these early positions with methodological writings in his History of Economic Analysis (1954) shows that he has not really shifted from methodological individualism to an institutional perspective that addresses the academic interplay and sees economic action rooted in historical predispositions, paths and social constraints.
-
Schumpeter’s Idea of a Universal Social Science
Atlantic Economic Journal, 2014Co-Authors: Dieter BögenholdAbstract:This paper deals with methodological principles of Schumpeter’s academic writings. Those principles led Schumpeter to create diverse works and were reflected systematically in some of his writings, where Schumpeter emerged as a theorist of science. Besides working on specific topics, Schumpeter dealt systematically with methodological issues in different works. Schumpeter’s History of Economic Analysis , in particular, must be regarded as the one study among his diverse works which is considered not only his latest but also his most relevant analysis concerning social sciences and the role of economics in relation to sociology, history, and other academic branches. The substantial preface of the History of Economic Analysis can be regarded as a manual on how to refer to different academic branches and integrate them into a coherent universal social science, which is far removed from being an autistic, narrow economic science of some modern representation. Although Schumpeter’s History of Economic Analysis has been extensively printed in several editions, the idea is that the preface especially reveals somewhat neglected thoughts in Schumpeterian discourse. While Schumpeter is mostly regarded as a pioneer of evolutionary economics, this paper argues that Schumpeter could also, perhaps primarily, be interpreted as a well-reasoning institutionalist aiming at a universal social science. From today’s point of view, Schumpeter is a truly interdisciplinary theorist.
-
Schumpeter's Idea of a Universal Science
2014Co-Authors: Dieter BögenholdAbstract:This paper deals with methodological principles of Schumpeter’s academic writings. Those principles led Schumpeter to create diverse works and were reflected systematically in some of his writings, where Schumpeter emerged as a theorist of science. Besides working on specific topics, Schumpeter dealt systematically with methodological issues in different works. Schumpeter’s History of Economic Analysis, in particular, must be regarded as the one study among his diverse works, which is considered not only his latest but also his most relevant analysis concerning social sciences and the role of economics in relation to sociology, history and other academic branches. The substantial preface of the History of Economic Analysis can be regarded as a manual on how to refer to different academic branches and integrate them into a coherent universal social science, which is far removed from being an autistic, narrow economic science of some modern representation. Although Schumpeter’s History of Economic Analysis has been extensively printed in several editions, the idea is that the preface especially reveals somewhat neglected thoughts in Schumpeterian discourse. While Schumpeter is mostly regarded as a pioneer of evolutionary economics, this paper argues that Schumpeter could also, perhaps primarily, be interpreted as a well-reasoning institutionalist aiming at a universal social science. From today’s point of view, Schumpeter is a truly interdisciplinary theorist.
Yuichi Shionoya - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Schmoller and Modern Economic Sociology
2006Co-Authors: Yuichi ShionoyaAbstract:Gustav von Schmoller, the leader of the younger German Historical School of Economics, criticized a theoretical approach of classical and neoclassical economics and advocated a historical approach. Schumpeter critically interpreted Schmoller’s research program as the prototype of economic sociology. Along the line suggested by Schumpeter, this paper formulates Schmoller’s attempt of economic sociology as a historical, ethical, and realistic approach to economics, with a focus on his conception of the economy and his specific topics, i.e., the Methodenstreit, the stage theory of development and social policy. Finally, this paper compares Schmoller’s economic sociology with the classical and the modern economic sociology and suggests his relevance to the present-day social theory.
-
scope and method of Schumpeter s universal social science economic sociology instrumentalism and rhetoric
Journal of The History of Economic Thought, 2004Co-Authors: Yuichi ShionoyaAbstract:This paper brings together and expands methodological ideas on Joseph Alois Schumpeter that I have discussed in detail and at length elsewhere (Shionoya 1997). Schumpeter is known for his wide-ranging work, and I interpret it as an attempt a universal social science consisting of three systems of thought: i.e., substantive theory, metatheory, and pretheory. These three systems stand for the scope and method of his universal social science.
-
Joseph Schumpeter and the German Historical School
The Theory of Capitalism in the German Economic Tradition, 2000Co-Authors: Yuichi ShionoyaAbstract:This paper discusses the relationship between Joseph Schumpeter and the German Historical School with regard to the theory and methodology of economics. Schumpeter was influenced by the approach of the German Historical School, especially that of the younger Historical School led by Gustav von Schmoller. The Historical School, however, was not the sole source of influence on Schumpeter’s thought; Leon Walras and Karl Marx influenced him to a greater extent. Thus, the historical economics, neoclassical economics, and Marxian economics were the intellectual field to which Schumpeter was positively committed. From this heterogeneous complex he developed his own system of social science.1
Richard Swedberg - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Schumpeter and Talcott Parsons
Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 2014Co-Authors: Richard SwedbergAbstract:This article looks at the relationship between Joseph Schumpeter and sociologist Talcott Parsons. The two met in the late 1920s at Harvard University, where both were teaching. At the time Parsons was a young instructor, while Schumpeter was an established economist; and as a result Schumpeter influenced Parsons much more than the other way around. Parsons especially appreciated Schumpeter’s view of economic theory. Their relationship continued in this way, with Schumpeter mainly influencing Parsons even if he also could keep an eye on what was happening in sociologythrough Parsons.
-
Joseph Schumpeter in Sweden
Scandinavian Economic History Review, 1997Co-Authors: Richard SwedbergAbstract:Abstract Different aspects of Schumpeter's relationship with Sweden are explored in this article. Schumpeter visited Sweden a few times in the inter-war period in his capacity of well-known economist. During World War I he also wished to go to Sweden to gather information that would be of assistance to the Austro-Hungarian Empire. Schumpeter refered occasionally to Sweden in his writings, usually as a symbol for socialism and as a threat to capitalism. However, he failed to recognise that Sweden also had a vigorous tradition of entrepreneurship, as exemplified by the Wallenberg family and the Rausings. Schumpeter's view of Swedish economists is also discussed, as is the extent to which Swedish economists have been influenced by Schumpeter.
-
Schumpeter's vision of socioeconomics
The Journal of Socio-Economics, 1995Co-Authors: Richard SwedbergAbstract:Abstract Just as Schumpeter many years ago had a brilliant vision of a new and broad kind of economics (what he called Sozialokonomik), so do many socioeconomists today have a similarly grand vision. Will they be able to implement it and translate it into important scientific works, on a par with the grandeur of the vision? Schumpeter's work may be relevant to answering this important question. Schumpeter experimented in his lifetime with two versions of socioeconomics, which were not equally successful. In his youth, he advocated a form of economic imperialism and erased the boundary between socioeconomics and the other social sciences. Later, however, Schumpeter accepted the valuable contributions that the noneconomic social sciences can also make to the understanding of economic phenomena, coming to advocate a collaboration between economics, sociology, economic history, and statistics.
-
Schumpeter a biography
1992Co-Authors: Richard SwedbergAbstract:This widely admired intellectual biography of Joseph Schumpeter (1883-1950) follows his career from his immensely creative and productive youth in Austria-Hungary to the strange depressions that plagued him during his later years and to his intellectual triumph as one of the great economists of the twentieth century. Richard Swedberg skillfully blends narrative with a thoughtful and knowledgeable evaluation of Schumpeter's major contributions to economics, history, sociology, and political science. "Richard Swedberg's biography of Schumpeter thoughtfully uncovers different layers of the eminent economist's personality...A lucid, readable study."--The New York Times Book Review "There are comparatively few intellectual biographies of genuine sociological interest. Richard Swedberg's new study of the Austrian social economist Joseph Schumpeter stands among the very best...Swedberg has done a magnificent job of bringing Schumpeter's achievement back to center stage."--Robert Holton, American Journal of Sociology "Swedberg has produced a unique and inspiring book which is a must for anyone interested in Schumpeter's personality as well as in his rich set of ideas." --Esben Sloth Andersen, Journal of Economic Literature Richard Swedberg, Associate Professor of Sociology at the University of Stockholm, is the coeditor, with Neil J. Smelser, of The Handbook of Economic Sociology(Princeton).
Heinz D. Kurz - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Is there a “Ricardian Vice”? And what is its relationship with economic policy ad“vice”?
Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 2017Co-Authors: Heinz D. KurzAbstract:Schumpeter chastised Ricardo for his alleged “vice” - the so-called “Ricardian Vice” - of drawing far reaching policy conclusions from utterly simplistic models, which, moreover, were underdetermined. The paper first argues that Schumpeter saw Ricardo’s approach to the theory of value and distribution through a marginalist lens and therefore arrived at a distorted picture of the latter. Several of the criticisms he levelled at Ricardo cannot be sustained. The paper then has a closer look at Schumpeter’s pronouncements on economic policy issues and shows that in a number of respects his views did not differ that much from Ricardo’s and in some respects were remarkably similar. This concerns especially the problem of paying off the public debt, with regard to which both Ricardo after the Napoleonic Wars and Schumpeter after World War I advocated a once for all capital levy.
-
The beat of the economic heart
Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 2015Co-Authors: Heinz D. KurzAbstract:The paper discusses the silimar, but in some respects different explanations of business cycles by Schumpeter and Arthur Spiethoff, his elderly friend and colleague. Spiethoff brought Schumpeter back into academics after the latter’s not very successful careers as a politician and a banker. Both insisted that cycles are endogenous and cannot possibly be eliminated without eliminating the dynamismof the capitalist economy. They thought that theoretical and historical studies were not mutually exclusive, but complementary. The gulf separating pure theory and historical studies since the so-called Methodenstreit was detrimental to the development of economics.
-
Schumpeter’s new combinations
Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 2012Co-Authors: Heinz D. KurzAbstract:The paper focuses attention on Schumpeter’s achievements in his classic contribution and how these relate to the contributions of other major authors. While deeply indebted to Marx’s vision of capitalism as a system incessantly in travail, Schumpeter was no ‘Marxist’. He shared Böhm’s view that profits are not due to ‘exploitation’, but thought that the latter’s attack on Marx was a failure. There are remarkable differences, but also similarities between the analyses of Schumpeter and Keynes. Marx, Schumpeter and Keynes rejected Say’s law and other basic ideas constituting the marginalist doctrine. They saw capitalism as a restless, crisis-prone system.
-
Schumpeter s new combinations
Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 2012Co-Authors: Heinz D. KurzAbstract:The paper focuses attention on Schumpeter’s achievements in his classic contribution and how these relate to the contributions of other major authors. While deeply indebted to Marx’s vision of capitalism as a system incessantly in travail, Schumpeter was no ‘Marxist’. He shared Bohm’s view that profits are not due to ‘exploitation’, but thought that the latter’s attack on Marx was a failure. There are remarkable differences, but also similarities between the analyses of Schumpeter and Keynes. Marx, Schumpeter and Keynes rejected Say’s law and other basic ideas constituting the marginalist doctrine. They saw capitalism as a restless, crisis-prone system.
Pierre Garrouste - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Rationality, behavior, institutional, and economic change in Schumpeter
Journal of Economic Methodology, 2008Co-Authors: Agnès Festré, Pierre GarrousteAbstract:In 1940 Schumpeter wrote a paper entitled: “The Meaning of Rationality in the Social Sciences”, which was intended to one of the meetings of a seminar including Talcott Parsons, Wassilly Leontief, Paul Sweezy and other Harvard scholars, that he took the initiative to start. In this paper Schumpeter develops thoroughly his own conception of rationality in economics. First, this paper is interesting in itself because it is based on a sophisticated methodological analysis. Schumpeter indeed interestingly anticipates some important debates concerning the problem of rationality and behavior in economics and presents arguments tha t make his ideas very topical. Second Schumpeter’s conception of rationality is linked to his methodological background (both individualistic and holistic), which is rooted in his economic sociology and explains the relationships he stresses between individual behavior and collective entities. In this contribution we present the arguments developed by Schumpeter in his 1940 paper and analyze the reason why his notion of rationality can be seen as a key component of his conception of economic and institutional change.
-
Rationality, behavior, institutional and economic change in Schumpeter
Journal of Economic Methodology, 2008Co-Authors: Agnès Festré, Pierre GarrousteAbstract:In 1940 Schumpeter wrote a paper entitled: "The Meaning of Rationality in the Social Sciences", which was intended to one of the meetings of a seminar including Talcott Parsons, Wassilly Léontief, Paul Sweezy and other Harvard scholars, that he took the initiative to start. In this paper Schumpeter develops thoroughly his own conception of rationality in economics. First, this paper is interesting in itself because it is based on a sophisticated methodological analysis. Schumpeter indeed interestingly anticipates some important debates concerning the problem of rationality and behavior in economics and presents arguments that make his ideas very topical. Second Schumpeter's conception of rationality is linked to his methodological background (both individualistic and holistic), which is rooted in his economic sociology and explains the relationships he stresses between individual behavior and collective entities. In this contribution we present the arguments developed by Schumpeter in his 1940 paper and analyze the reason why his notion of rationality can be seen as a key component of his conception of economic and institutional change.
