Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T08:00:34.776Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

WIESER’S UNITY OF THOUGHT

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 November 2015

Natsuka Tokumaru
Natsuka Tokumaru*
Affiliation:
Graduate School of Economics, Kyoto University, Japan.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In his attempt to improve Carl Menger’s economics, Friedrich von Wieser frequently discussed methodological issues. This paper proposes that Wieser’s epistemological position can be understood as the result of a reformulation of the empirical position that Menger (1871) developed in his Grundsätze der Volkswirthschaftslehre. This paper proposes four ways of interpreting Wieser’s concept of “experience”: i) experience stored in language, ii) experience as introspection, iii) experience as a mental experiment, and iv) experience as observation. Because Wieser applied the concept of “motivational power” derived from psychological induction in order to explain observable social phenomena, this paper calls his position “methodological motivationalism.” This particular position can help explain his later shift to sociological studies.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of the History of Economic Thought , Volume 37 , Issue 4 , December 2015 , pp. 583 - 596
Copyright
Copyright © The History of Economics Society 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Arena, Richard. 2010. “Friedrich von Wieser on Institutions and Social Economics.” In Hagemann, Harald, Nishizawa, Tamotsu, and Ikeda, Yukihiro, eds., Austrian Economics in Transition: From Carl Menger to Friedrich Hayek. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 109–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
HayekFriedrich, A Friedrich, A. [1929] 1992. “Friedrich von Wieser (1851–1926).” In Klein, Peter G., ed., Collected Works of F. A. Hayek. Volume 4, The Fortunes of Liberalism: Essays on Austrian Economics and the Ideal of Freedom. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp. 108–125.Google Scholar
HutchisonTerence, W Terence, W. [1953] 1967. A Review of Economic Doctrines 1870–1929. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kauder, Emil 1957. “Intellectual and Political Roots of the Older Austrian School.” Zeitschrift für Nationalökonomie XVII, 4 (December): 411–425.Google Scholar
Mäki, Uskali. 1990a. “Mengerian Economics in Realist Perspective.” In Caldwell, Bruce, ed., Carl Menger and His Legacy in Economics. Durham: Duke University Press, pp. 289–310.Google Scholar
Mäki, Uskali. 1990b. “Scientific Realism and Austrian Explanation.” Review of Political Economy 2 (3): 310–344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Menger, Carl. [1871] 2004. Principles of Economics. Ludwig von Mises Institute: electronic online edition. Originally published asGrundsätze der Volkswirthschaftlehre (Wien: Wilhelm Braumüller).Google Scholar
Menger, Carl. [1883] 1985. Investigations into the Method of the Social Sciences. New York; London: New York University Press. Originally published as Untersuchungen über die Methode der Sozialwissenschaften, und der politischen Ökonomie insbesondere.Google Scholar
Milford, Karl. 2010. “A Note on Menger’s Problem Situation and Non-essentialist Approach to Economics.” In Hagemann, Harald, Nishizawa, Tamotsu, and Ikeda, Yukihiro, eds., Austrian Economics in Transition: From Carl Menger to Friedrich Hayek. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 154–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mises, Ludwig von. [1933] 1960. Epistemological Problems of Economics. Translated by George Reisman. Princeton: Van Nostrand. Originally published as Grundprobleme der Nationalökonomie: Untersuchungen über Verfahren, Aufgaben und Inhalt der Wirtschafts und Gesellschaftslehre.Google Scholar
Mitchell, Wesley C. 1917. “Wieser’s Theory of Social Economics.” Political Science Quarterly 32 (1): 95–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Popper, Karl R. [1934] 1959. The Logic of Scientific Discovery. London: Hutchison & Co. Ltd. Originally published as Die Logik der Forschung.Google Scholar
Streissler, Erich W. 1986. “Arma virumque cano: Friedrich von Wieser, the Bard as Economist.” In Leser, Norbert, ed., Die Wiener Schule der Nationalökonomie. Wien: Böhlau, pp. 83–106.Google Scholar
Tokumaru, Natsuka. 2009. “Popper’s Analysis of the Problems of Induction and Demarcation and Mises’ Justification of the Theoretical Social Science.” In Robert, S. Cohen and Parusnikova, Zusana, eds., Rethinking Popper. Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science. Volume 272. Netherlands: Springer, pp. 161–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wieser, Friedrich von. 1884. Über den Ursprung und die Hauptgesetze des wirtschaftlichen Werthes. Wien: Alfred Hölder.Google Scholar
Wieser, Friedrich von. [1889] 1956. Natural Value. Translated by Malloch, Christian A.. New York: A. M. Kelley. Originally published as Der natürliche Werth (Wien: Alfred Hölder).Google Scholar
Wieser, Friedrich von. 1891. “The Austrian School and the Theory of Value.” The Economic Journal 1 (1): 108–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wieser, Friedrich von. [1914] 2003. Social Economics. Translated by Ford Hinrichs, A.. London: Routledge. Originally published as Theorie der gesellschaftlichen Wirtschaft, Grundriss der Sozialökonomik, Abteilung I, Teil.II (Tübingen: Verlag von J. C. B. Mohr).Google Scholar
Wieser, Friedrich von. [1926] 1983. The Law of Power. Translated by Kuhn, W. E.. Lincoln: University of Nebraska-Lincoln. Originally published as Das Gesetz der Macht (Wien: Julius Springer).Google Scholar