W.C.ミッチェルとアダム・スミス経済理論(ヴェブレンとミッチェルの理論体係,共同研究)

概要

論文の詳細を見る
Wesley C. Mitchell, a founder of the American Institutional School, published a number of studies on business cycles in the first half of this century. I believe that Mitchell's empirical and statistical studies certainly provided a firmer foundation for Thorstein B. Veblen's pioneer work. His Types of Economic Theory: From Mercantilism to Institutionalism (1934-35) is also a systematic critique of economics based on the principle of cumulative causation. Further, using this evolutionary method, he approaches the economic theories of Adam Smith in "The Social Sciences and National Planning," "Making Goods and Making Money," and "Intelligence and the Guidance of Economic Evolution" in his The Backward Art of Spending Money, and Other Essays (1950). In his studies on the economic theories of Adam Smith, Mitchell does not deal in depth with the theory of the division of labour. This approach cannot be considered appropriate, given that the central problem in Adam Smith's economic theory is the production of wealth. Still, Mitchell does give due importance to the significance of laissez faire and the injurious effect of monopolies, and the intellectual interaction of scientific technology and economics. So I should say that Mitchell left significant findings on future social and economic trends that are worth reexamining. That is why I have planned the present study, whose subject is an exposition of the superiority and some limitations of Mitchell's views on Adam Smith's economic theories. Chapter II describes the intellectual interaction between Adam Smith and James Watt. Mitchell points out that both men were powerful forces in the Industrial Revolution, the former as an economic theorist and the latter as an engineer. That is to say, the opportunity for individual initiative in economic action as expounded by Smith and James Watt's engine, in a mutually dependent relationship, brought about an increase in productivity. Here I will examine a part of the social background of Adam Smith's times from the viewpoint of engineering improvements made to the spinning machine and its engine. In Chapter III, I will elucidate on one of Mitchell's theories of economic policy in his discussion of Adam Smith's An Inquiry into the Nature and Cuases of the Wealth of Nations (1776), including a destructive critique of the national planning done by mercantilist statesmen and a constructive argument for a policy of laissez faire. Chapter IV is a comparative examination of views on Adam Smith's theory of the division of labour and Emil Durkheim's De la division du travail social (1893). I believe that Durkheim's observations on the social function of the division of labour and the relationship between the development of the division of labour and morality are superior to Smith's theory, since it is difficult to determine whether "the propensity to truck, barter, and exchange one thing for another" on which Smith based his division of labour does in fact exist. Further, introducing the division of labour based on Smith's uniquely Scottish concept of human nature can cause the internal relation between the determining constituent of human nature described in his Theory of Moral Sentiments (1759) and his theory of the division of labour to be overlooked. That Mitchell did not always point these issues out clearly is one of the limitations of his work on the economic theories of Adam Smith. The above points, then, are the ones I have taken up in my research on Adam Smith's economic theories as examined by Wesley C. Mitchell in Chapter II-Adam Smith and James Watt, Chapter III-Mercantilism and Laissez Faire, and Chapter IV-Mitchell and Durkheim concerning The Theory of The Division of Labour.
日本大学の論文
1990-03-20

著者

佐藤光宣
帝京大学法学部

W.C.ミッチェルとアダム・スミス経済理論(ヴェブレンとミッチェルの理論体係,共同研究)

スポンサーリンク

概要

著者

関連論文

スポンサーリンク