ソースタイン・ヴェブレンと経済理論 : ダグラス・F・ダウドの見解について(ヴェブレンとミッチェルの理論体系,総合研究)

概要

論文の詳細を見る
Thorstein Veblen is known as the founder of American institutional economics. His thought became one of the precedents for the concept of the New Deal in the 1930s of America. Because his thought brought about an intellectual turning point in the history of the United States, study of it offers an important key to understanding later trends in American thought. Studies of Veblen's work are too numerous to count, and recently a large number of studies have appeared on his methodology of economics. In the process of forming his own economic theory, Veblen was sharply critical of classical economics, historical economics, neo-classical economics, and Marxian economics. In this paper I would like to examine Douglas F. Dowd's well-known Thorstein Veblen (1964). I will introduce Dowd's thoughts concerning Veblen's criticism of neo-classical and Marxian economics and add some of my own. According to Dowd, 1) Veblen was most interested in the change in technology, the nature and function of economic and legal institutions, and the process of social change resulting from the interaction of these. Veblen gave special emphasis to the institutional meaning of technology. 2) Veblen referred to neo-classical economics as marginal-utility economics. His method of criticizing a school of thought was to clarify the basic postulates and preconceptions underlying the school and to show their limits in terms of economics. Using this method, he showed that neo-classical economics was actually based on the hedonistic psychology of old. Neo-classical economics was also a product of the optimism of the Victorian age. 3) Veblen was also critical of Marxian economics, and he evaluated it correctly. He paid the greatest attention to Marx's theories. The most important of these was the "dialectical" process of change. Veblen suggests that "metaphysical preconceptions" can be found in Marx's views. He goes on to state that these preconceptions are related to a materialistic conception of history, and that in this conception there are the process of a dialectic derived from the Hegelian system. However, Marx's theory of history is difficult to accept. Just as neo-classical economics, his concept was a product of the Victorian age. Now I would like to investigate Dowd's views. Dowd offers his opinions concerning Veblen's criticism of neo-classical economics, and they are both appropriate and well arranged overall. He also comments on Veblen's criticism of Marxian economics, and these views are also of high theoretical standards. However, Dowd's explanation of Veblen's method is insufficient. I believe that Veblen used a dialectical method touched by Hegel's influence. Furthermore, I would like to emphasize that Veblen's dialectic was different from that of Hegel or Marx in its embracing of "blind drift and chance." Veblen was aware that the rapid developments in technology and industry in the late nineteenth century America had brought about dramatic changes in human behavior. I think that he believed that these rapid changes had been brought about by the dialectic process. Unfortunately, this view is not recognized in Dowd's work.
日本大学の論文
1993-05-20

ソースタイン・ヴェブレンと経済理論 : ダグラス・F・ダウドの見解について(ヴェブレンとミッチェルの理論体系,総合研究)

スポンサーリンク

概要

著者

関連論文

スポンサーリンク