Journals / Hacettepe Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi / 2009 / Cilt: 27 - Sayı: 1

How Should the History of Economic Analysis be Approached? II

İktisadi Analiz Tarihine Nasıl Yaklaşmak Gerekir? (II)

Pages
45–72
Publication Date
2022-10-18
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Thus in the paper, a classification among different schools of thought on the basis of the invisible hand conception is developed, and the analytical problems associated with this conception are discussed.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The present paper aims at developing a classification that can distinguish among different schools of thought in economics.
📊
Key Findings & Data:For this aim in mind, two analitical problems that could be useful to distinguish amog different schools of thought are identified: “the coordination problem”, which seeks to explain the emergence of equilibrium out of individual self-interested behavior; and the “order” problem that seeks to explain the emergence of an economic and social order that would be capable of reproducing itself smoothly and continuously.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Thus in the paper, a classification among different schools of thought on the basis of the invisible hand conception is developed, and the analytical problems associated with this conception are discussed.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

The present paper aims at developing a classification that can distinguish among different schools of thought in economics. For this aim in mind, two analitical problems that could be useful to distinguish amog different schools of thought are identified: “the coordination problem”, which seeks to explain the emergence of equilibrium out of individual self-interested behavior; and the “order” problem that seeks to explain the emergence of an economic and social order that would be capable of reproducing itself smoothly and continuously. These two problems, it is noted, are two façades of the same “problematic” of economics, namely the “Invisible Hand”. Thus in the paper, a classification among different schools of thought on the basis of the invisible hand conception is developed, and the analytical problems associated with this conception are discussed.

Özet

Bu yazı, farklı iktisadi düşünce okulları arasında bir sınıflama yapma amacı gütmektedir. Bu amaçla, iktisadi düşünce okullarını birbirinden ayırdetmede yarar sağlayabilecek iki analitik sorun üzerinde durulmaktadır: bireysel çıkara dayalı davranışlar arasındaki uyumun nasıl sağlanacağına yönelik olan “koordinasyon sorunu” ile kendi kendisini sürekli olarak ve zorlanmadan yeniden üretme kapasitesine sahip olan bir toplumsal ve ekonomik düzenin nasıl ortaya çıkabileceğine yönelik “düzen” sorunu. Bu iki sorun aslında, iktisadın temel “sorunsalı” olan “Görünmez El” kavrayışının iki yüzünü göstermektedir. Dolayısıyla, bu yazıda, farklı okullar, görünmez el anlayışı ve ona yönelik eleştiriler bağlamında bir sınıflama içinde sunulacaktır.

🔖

Cite This Article

ÖZEL, H. (2022). How Should the History of Economic Analysis be Approached? II. Hacettepe Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt: 27 - Sayı: 1, 45–72. https://ajindex.com/articles/533181

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (24)

  1. Araz-Takay, B. and H. Özel (2008) “Schumpeter and the Evolutionary Economics: Three Conceptual Issues”, 12th Annual Conference of the European Society for the History of Economic Thought: Development and Transition in the History of Economic Thought, Konferans tebliğ, Prague, 15th – 17th Mayıs. Arrow, K. (1994) “Methodological Individualism and Social Knowledge”, American Economic Review, Papers and Proceedings, 84(2), 1-9.
  2. Arrow, K. and F. Hahn (1971)
  3. General Competitive Analysis, San Fransisco: Holden-Day. Audretsch, D.B, W.J. Baumol and A. E. Burke (2001) “Competition Policy in Dynamic Markets”, International Journal of Industrial Organization, 19, 613-634.
  4. Bhaskar, R. (1975)
  5. A Realist Theory of Science, Leeds: Leeds Books. Bonner, J. (1986) Introduction to the Theory of Social Choice, Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
  6. Bulutay, T. (1979)
  7. Genel Denge Kuramı, Ankara:
  8. SBF Yayınları.
  9. Caldwell, B. (1997) “Hayek and Socialism,” The Journal of Economic Literature, 35(4), 1856-1890.
  10. Caldwell, B. (2004) Hayek’s Challenge: An Intellectual Biography, Chicago: Chicago University Press.
  11. Catephores (1994) “The Imperious Austrian: Schumpeter as Bourgeois Marxist”, New Left Review, 205 (Mayıs-Haziran), 3-30.
  12. Costabile, L. (2005) “Money, Cycles and Capital Formation: von Mises the ‘Austrian’ vs. Robertson the ‘Dynamist’”, Cambridge Journal of Economics, 29 (Şubat), 685-707.
  13. Desai, M. (1977)
  14. Marksist İktisat Teorisi, N. Satlıgan (Çev.), İstanbul:
  15. Birikim Yayınları.
  16. Dosi, G. et al. (1988)
  17. Technical Change and Economic Theory, London: Pinter Publisher.
  18. Ebeling, R.M. (2004) “Avusturya Okulu’nun Konjonktür Dalgalanmaları Teorisi”, Piyasa, 11 (Yaz), 121-126.
  19. Ebner, A. (2006) “Schumpeterian Entrepreneurship Revisited: Historical Specificity and the Phases of Capitalist Development”, Journal of the History of Economic Thought, 28(3), 315-32.
  20. Ertürk, K. (1996) “On the Keynesian Notion of Equilibrium and Dynamics,” Cambridge Journal of Economics, 20, 371-386.
  21. Faberberg, J. (2003) “Schumpeter and the Revival of Evolutionary Economics: An Appraisal of the Literature”, Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 13, 125-59.
  22. Foster, J. (2000) “Competitive Selection, Self-organization, and Joseph A. Schumpeter”, Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 10, 311-328.
  23. Foster, J. and J.S. Metcalfe (2001)
  24. Frontiers of Evolutionary Economics, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. Garrison, R. (1996) “The Austrian Theory: A Summary”, The Austrian Theory of the Trade Cycle and Other Essays, Auburn, Alabama