Idealism and Economics

By -
First cut on a proposal for a co-edited volume:

The contribution of idealist thinkers to political philosophy are well known and have been examined in depth. But when it comes to economics, the other parent of political economy, much less has been said. This is despite the fact that idealists have made important contributions to economic theory and its application, including Plato's analysis of the division of labour, Berkeley's economic thought, which Keynes considered the most advanced of its time, Hegel's analysis of commercial society, and Collingwood's, Croce's, and von Mises's similar analyses of economics as a "philosophical science."

This volume attempts to begin filling that gap by collecting together commentaries on economic theory and economic issues from a number of prominent idealist thinkers, as well as contemporary authors. In addition, the general introduction, as well as the introductions to each essay, will seek to answer such questions as: Is there a general idealist approach to economics? and If so, does it offer a unique and important perspective on the discipline?

Comments

  1. Daniel3:16 PM

    This sounds really fascinating, and not the common recycled take on the same questions. Great idea.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Libertarians, My Libertarians!

By -
Cruel to be kind means that I love you . Because, while I think you are mistaken, your hearts are in the right place -- yes, even you, Silas --  unlike some people . This Breitbart fellow (discussed in the link above), by all appearances, deliberately doctored a video of Shirley Sherrod to make her remarks appear virulently racist, when they had, in fact, the opposite import. I heard that at a recent Austrian conference, some folks were talking about "Callahan's conservative turn." While that description is not entirely inaccurate, I must say that a lot of these people who today call themselves conservative give me the heebie-jeebies.
Read more

"Pre-Galilean" Foolishness

By -
 I am currently reading The Master and His Emissary , which appears to be an excellent book. ("Appears" because I don't know the neuroscience literature well enough to say for sure, yet.) But then on page 186 I find: "Asking cognition, however, to give a perspective on the relationship between cognition and affect is like asking astronomer in the pre-Galilean geocentric world, whether, in his opinion, the sun moves round the earth of the earth around the sun. To ask a question alone would be enough to label one as mad." OK, this is garbage. First of all, it should be pre-Copernican, not pre-Galilean. But much worse is that people have seriously been considering heliocentrism for many centuries before Copernicus. Aristarchus had proposed a heliocentric model in the 4th-century BC. It had generally been considered wrong, but not "mad." (And wrong for scientific reasons: Why, for instance, did we not observe stellar parallax?) And when Copernicus propose
Read more