“开放”:斯拉法经济思想的方法论原则

John B. Davis
{"title":"“开放”:斯拉法经济思想的方法论原则","authors":"John B. Davis","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3476662","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Piero Sraffa’s Production of Commodities by Means of Commodities (1960) was path-breaking as a contribution to political economy and penetrating as a critique of the orthodox economics of the twentieth century. As Ajit Sinha recently put it, the book produced a ‘revolution in economic theory’ (Sinha, A Revolution in Economic Theory: The Economics of Piero Sraffa, London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2016; cf. Martins, “The Sraffian Methodenstreit and the Revolution in Economic Theory,” Cambridge Journal of Economics 43 (2): 507–525, 2019), the impact and significance of which continues to be investigated. At the same time, despite the depth and far-reaching implications of Sraffa’s critique of orthodox economics it was ignored by the great majority of economists, and this not only complicates our understanding of its impact on economic theory, but also creates a paradox regarding our interpretation of ‘the’ history of economics. For Sraffa, ‘the’ history of economics dates back at least to Adam Smith and David Ricardo as founders of a subject specifically understood as political economy. Yet economics today is no longer identified as political economy by most people in the field, but is conventionally said to be a science independent of history, politics, and social values, and thus makes little reference to how the social organization of the economy was a distinctive characteristic of the thinking of Smith, Ricardo, Marx, and others in the history of political economy.","PeriodicalId":226815,"journal":{"name":"Philosophy & Methodology of Economics eJournal","volume":"96 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-10-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"‘Openness’ as a Methodological Principle of Sraffa’s Economic Thinking\",\"authors\":\"John B. Davis\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.3476662\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Piero Sraffa’s Production of Commodities by Means of Commodities (1960) was path-breaking as a contribution to political economy and penetrating as a critique of the orthodox economics of the twentieth century. As Ajit Sinha recently put it, the book produced a ‘revolution in economic theory’ (Sinha, A Revolution in Economic Theory: The Economics of Piero Sraffa, London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2016; cf. Martins, “The Sraffian Methodenstreit and the Revolution in Economic Theory,” Cambridge Journal of Economics 43 (2): 507–525, 2019), the impact and significance of which continues to be investigated. At the same time, despite the depth and far-reaching implications of Sraffa’s critique of orthodox economics it was ignored by the great majority of economists, and this not only complicates our understanding of its impact on economic theory, but also creates a paradox regarding our interpretation of ‘the’ history of economics. For Sraffa, ‘the’ history of economics dates back at least to Adam Smith and David Ricardo as founders of a subject specifically understood as political economy. Yet economics today is no longer identified as political economy by most people in the field, but is conventionally said to be a science independent of history, politics, and social values, and thus makes little reference to how the social organization of the economy was a distinctive characteristic of the thinking of Smith, Ricardo, Marx, and others in the history of political economy.\",\"PeriodicalId\":226815,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Philosophy & Methodology of Economics eJournal\",\"volume\":\"96 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-10-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Philosophy & Methodology of Economics eJournal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3476662\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Philosophy & Methodology of Economics eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3476662","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

皮耶罗·斯拉法的《以商品为手段的商品生产》(1960)是对政治经济学的开创性贡献,也是对20世纪正统经济学的深刻批判。正如阿吉特·辛哈(Ajit Sinha)最近所说,这本书引发了一场“经济理论革命”(辛哈,《经济理论革命:皮耶罗·斯拉法经济学》,伦敦:帕尔格雷夫·麦克米伦出版社,2016;参见Martins,“The raffian Methodenstreit and The Revolution in Economic Theory”,《剑桥经济学杂志》(Cambridge Journal of Economics) 43(2): 507-525, 2019),其影响和意义仍在研究中。与此同时,尽管斯拉法对正统经济学的批判具有深刻而深远的影响,但它却被绝大多数经济学家所忽视,这不仅使我们对其对经济理论的影响的理解变得复杂,而且在我们对经济学“历史”的解释上造成了一个悖论。对斯拉法来说,经济学的“历史”至少可以追溯到亚当·斯密和大卫·李嘉图,他们是专门被理解为政治经济学的学科的创始人。然而,今天的经济学不再被该领域的大多数人认定为政治经济学,而是传统上被认为是一门独立于历史、政治和社会价值的科学,因此很少提及经济的社会组织如何成为斯密、李嘉图、马克思和政治经济学史上其他人思想的一个显著特征。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
‘Openness’ as a Methodological Principle of Sraffa’s Economic Thinking
Piero Sraffa’s Production of Commodities by Means of Commodities (1960) was path-breaking as a contribution to political economy and penetrating as a critique of the orthodox economics of the twentieth century. As Ajit Sinha recently put it, the book produced a ‘revolution in economic theory’ (Sinha, A Revolution in Economic Theory: The Economics of Piero Sraffa, London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2016; cf. Martins, “The Sraffian Methodenstreit and the Revolution in Economic Theory,” Cambridge Journal of Economics 43 (2): 507–525, 2019), the impact and significance of which continues to be investigated. At the same time, despite the depth and far-reaching implications of Sraffa’s critique of orthodox economics it was ignored by the great majority of economists, and this not only complicates our understanding of its impact on economic theory, but also creates a paradox regarding our interpretation of ‘the’ history of economics. For Sraffa, ‘the’ history of economics dates back at least to Adam Smith and David Ricardo as founders of a subject specifically understood as political economy. Yet economics today is no longer identified as political economy by most people in the field, but is conventionally said to be a science independent of history, politics, and social values, and thus makes little reference to how the social organization of the economy was a distinctive characteristic of the thinking of Smith, Ricardo, Marx, and others in the history of political economy.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
"The Eyes and Ears of the Agricultural Markets": A History of Information in Interwar Agricultural Economics Deepening and Widening Social Identity Analysis in Economics In Search of Santa Claus: Samuelson, Stigler, and Coase Theorem Worlds Reports from China: Joan Robinson as Observer and Travel Writer, 1953-78 Introduction to a Symposium on Carl Menger on the Centenary of his Death
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1