Фридрих фон Визер родился в Вене в 1851 году, и после раннего образования в области социологии он, вместе со своим коллегой, другом детства и шурином Евгением фон Бем-Баверком, стал видным и ведущим членом ранней австрийской школы Карла Менгера.
Визер и Бем-Баверк подготовили следующее поколение "австрийцев" в Вене с начала 1890-ых и в конце 1900-ых, таких как Людвиг фон Мизес, Фридрих Хайек и Й. Шумпетер.

Полная версия публикации

It is often alleged that the German historical school and the American institutional school possess a number of doctrinal and theoretical similarities.[1] Since ideas of figures within each of these schools are not homogeneous, a comparison in a short piece such as this is best focused on specific individuals

Полная версия публикации

It is well known that Thorstein Veblen accused the turn-of-the-century captains of industry of sabotage. What is not so well known is that, for Veblen, sabotage was not simply a pejorative term. By sabotage, he meant a "conscientious withdrawal of efficiency" [Veblen 1990a, 38]. But efficiency, as both Veblen and a number of the engineers of his time used the term, was not the now-standard microeconomic efficiency represented by the minimum point on a U-shaped long-run average total cost curve. Veblen espoused a "technical," rather than a cost-based, definition of efficiency. The difference between these two views of efficiency can best be understood by focusing on some of the early engineers--in particular the early Taylorites--from whom Veblen borrowed heavily and who were in turn influenced greatly by Veblen in their own thinking about efficiency.

Полная версия публикации

Several matters require clarification at the outset. The John Adams of my title is not the John Adams of my author. The former was the second President of the United States, from Massachusetts; the latter is the speaker, who hails from Texas, partner. The speaker's name is actually John Quincy Adams, which is the name of the titular John Adams's eldest son, who was the sixth President of the United States. The speaker has been president only of the Association for Evolutionary Economics and of the Eastern Economic Association, and appears before you today in this latter guise. He suppressed the Quincy when he began doing economics in order to reduce the frequency of exclamations about his name, such well-meant intrusions into his privacy having dogged him since his earliest remembered childhood moments

Полная версия публикации

Thorstein Veblen is celebrated, among other things, for his analysis of the operation, at the deepest structural levels, of certain habits of thought, systems of preconceptions, or prepossessions.[1] These habitualized and typically unrecognized and unchallenged preconceptions are derived from the practices of ordinary life, especially how people make a living, and the organizational arrangements within which people live. If institutions are defined as habits of thought, then these habits of thought manifest and are driven by deep discursive formations, in much the same sense as the later structuralism of Michel Foucault

Полная версия публикации

The first three decades of the twentieth century witnessed the appearance of the works of three scholars who, each in his way, produced a comprehensive theory of society. The theoretical systems of Max Weber, Vilfredo Pareto, and Thorstein Veblen encompassed, and made substantive contributions to, the fields of economics, sociology, political science, and psychology, as well as sociolinguistics broadly defined. The list of their principal modern precursors is arguably small but distinguished: Giambattista Vico, Adam Smith, Henri de Saint-Simon, Auguste Comte, and Karl Marx.

Полная версия публикации

War is continuation of political commercial policy by other means. --Karl von Clausewitz, 1832
Unlike most of their contemporaries, Henry George and Thorstein Veblen perceived the nature of war to be central to the study of economics. The two heterodox thinkers investigated the warlike animus almost a half century before the Cold War and the subsequent arms buildup that characterizes the post-World War II era. Their ability to distinguish between the latent and manifest functions of war remains as penetrating today as it was at the end of the nineteenth century (when George was writing) and in the early part of the twentieth century (when Veblen published most of his work).

Полная версия публикации

F. Scott Fitzgerald's short novel The Great Gatsby is set in the 1920s; like its author, it is strongly identified with the Jazz Age-that temporal slice of self-indulgence sandwiched between the Great War and the Great Depression. Yet Fitzgerald's original setting for Gatsby was the middle of the Gilded Age (1885), and the theme of the novel is widely recognized as an indictment not so much of the Roaring Twenties as of the "American Dream," which had attained an honored place in American mythology well before the opening of the twentieth century.[1] It is my contention in this paper that much of the socioeconomic satire informing The Great Gatsby is not original with Fitzgerald, but reflects the influence, both directly and indirectly, of that earlier adversary of conspicuous consumption and pecuniary emulation, Thorstein Veblen.

Полная версия публикации

In a thorough survey of Thorstein Veblen's "intellectual antecedents," Stephen Edgell and Rick Tilman provide a list of possible influences on Veblen's ideas [Edgell and Tilman 1989, 1003-1004]. A name missing is Veblen's one-time professor, John Bates Clark (1847-1938). Clark's influence on Veblen has usually been construed as minimal at best and mainly one of opposing ideas [Henry 1995, 3]

Полная версия публикации

Scholars interested in the significance of the ideas of Thorstein Veblen have managed to generate a substantial amount of research, which, when considered as a whole, supports the claim that Veblen's intellectual influence on subsequent generations of economists was anything but trivial. Wesley C. Mitchell, Clarence Ayres, J. Fagg Foster, Warren J. Samuels, Allan Gruchy, and John Kenneth Galbraith are only some of the more notable luminaries whose works are widely cited as evidence of the enduring power and insight of Veblen's own contributions. However, the literature expressly devoted to the articulation of this Veblenian legacy has, as the names cited above might intimate

Полная версия публикации