凡勃伦对马克思政治经济学哲学先入之见的批判

IF 0.6 3区 经济学 Q4 ECONOMICS European Journal of the History of Economic Thought Pub Date : 1997-03-01 DOI:10.1080/10427719700000020
P. O’Hara
{"title":"凡勃伦对马克思政治经济学哲学先入之见的批判","authors":"P. O’Hara","doi":"10.1080/10427719700000020","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper explores some of the theoretical linkages between Thorstein Veblen and Karl Marx. Special reference is placed Veblen's criticisms of Marx and the Marxist tradition for adhering to the preconceptions of (a) the natural right of labour to the full product, and (b) the teleology of conscious agents directing action towards change. Veblen was incorrect to believe that Marx adhered to the natural right of labour thesis, but he was correct to assert that Marx utilized undesirable teleologies. Overall, however, Veblen was attempting to reformulate and modernise the materialistic conception of history through an evolutionary analysis of institutions. The two thinkers complement each other in important ways, although Veblen's analysis is more evolutionary, collectivist and holistic.","PeriodicalId":51791,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of the History of Economic Thought","volume":"4 1","pages":"65-91"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"1997-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/10427719700000020","citationCount":"10","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Veblen's critique of Marx's philosophical preconceptions of political economy\",\"authors\":\"P. O’Hara\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/10427719700000020\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper explores some of the theoretical linkages between Thorstein Veblen and Karl Marx. Special reference is placed Veblen's criticisms of Marx and the Marxist tradition for adhering to the preconceptions of (a) the natural right of labour to the full product, and (b) the teleology of conscious agents directing action towards change. Veblen was incorrect to believe that Marx adhered to the natural right of labour thesis, but he was correct to assert that Marx utilized undesirable teleologies. Overall, however, Veblen was attempting to reformulate and modernise the materialistic conception of history through an evolutionary analysis of institutions. The two thinkers complement each other in important ways, although Veblen's analysis is more evolutionary, collectivist and holistic.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51791,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of the History of Economic Thought\",\"volume\":\"4 1\",\"pages\":\"65-91\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"1997-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/10427719700000020\",\"citationCount\":\"10\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of the History of Economic Thought\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/10427719700000020\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of the History of Economic Thought","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10427719700000020","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 10

摘要

本文探讨了凡勃伦与马克思之间的一些理论联系。凡勃伦对马克思和马克思主义传统的批评,特别提到了他坚持以下先入之见:(a)劳动对全部产品的自然权利,以及(b)有意识的代理人指导行动走向变化的目的论。凡勃伦认为马克思坚持劳动的自然权利论点是错误的,但他断言马克思利用了不受欢迎的目的论是正确的。然而,总的来说,凡勃伦试图通过对制度的进化分析来重新制定和现代化唯物主义的历史观。这两位思想家在很多重要方面互为补充,尽管凡勃伦的分析更倾向于进化、集体主义和整体主义。
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
Veblen's critique of Marx's philosophical preconceptions of political economy
This paper explores some of the theoretical linkages between Thorstein Veblen and Karl Marx. Special reference is placed Veblen's criticisms of Marx and the Marxist tradition for adhering to the preconceptions of (a) the natural right of labour to the full product, and (b) the teleology of conscious agents directing action towards change. Veblen was incorrect to believe that Marx adhered to the natural right of labour thesis, but he was correct to assert that Marx utilized undesirable teleologies. Overall, however, Veblen was attempting to reformulate and modernise the materialistic conception of history through an evolutionary analysis of institutions. The two thinkers complement each other in important ways, although Veblen's analysis is more evolutionary, collectivist and holistic.
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
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
28.60%
发文量
67
期刊介绍: The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought (EJHET), a peer-reviewed journal, has quickly established itself as a leading forum for lively discussion on a wide range of issues in the history of economic thought. With contributions from both established international scholars and younger academics, EJHET is entirely pluralist and non-partisan with regard to subjects and methodologies - it does not subscribe to any particular current of thought, nor relate to any one geographic zone. The Managing Editors and Editorial Board and Advisory Board members are drawn from throughout Europe and beyond, and are committed to encouraging scholars from around the world to contribute to international research and debate.
期刊最新文献
European Journal of the History of Economic Thought vol. 30, issue 6 (December 2023) Wartime in the history of economic thought: episodes in European history The Palgrave companion to Oxford economics, Adam Smith: Sytematic Philosopher and Public Thinker James Steuart and the making of Karl Marx’s monetary thought
×
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