KaydedilenlerDerginizi ekleyin

Dergiler / İktisat Politikası Araştırmaları Dergisi / 2025 / Cilt: 12 Sayı: 1

Lachmann and Veblen: Institutions versus Neoclassicism

Adem Levent

Sayfa
112–127
Yayın Tarihi
2025-02-14
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗

Abstract

In this study, an intellectual relationship endeavour is constituted between Lachmann and Veblen through the lens of institutions. Their mutual perspective lies in their efforts to understand economics through institutions, diverging from orthodox neoclassical economics. Simultaneously, the authors share a similarity in their ways of defining institutions. The foundations of institutions, as conceived by Lachmann in the plans within the human mind and the institutions expressing Veblen’s habits of thoughts and life, are closely aligned. This proximity established through institutions also provides an opportunity to address the enduring problem of the actor-structure dilemma in social theory. In other words, the article offers a different resolution to the ongoing debate between methodological individualism and methodological holism in social theory through the developed connection between Lachmann and Veblen. Furthermore, the hermeneutic approach, which has found limited traction in economics, persists firmly with Lachmann and Veblen. The hermeneutic approach, overt in Lachmann and more implicit in Veblen, presents another possibility for establishing an intellectual relationship between the two scholars. JEL Classification : A14 , B25 , B31 , B41

Anahtar kelimeler
🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

Levent, A. (2025). Lachmann and Veblen: Institutions versus Neoclassicism. İktisat Politikası Araştırmaları Dergisi, Cilt: 12 Sayı: 1, 112–127. https://doi.org/10.26650/JEPR1545178

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

↗Yeni Sekme

PDF belgesi yükleniyor...

Kaynakça (65)

  1. Agassi, J. (1975). Institutional Individualism, The British Journal of Sociology, 26 (2): 144-155. google scholar
  2. Boettke, P. J. (1989). Evolution and Economics: Austrians as Institutionalist, Research in the History of Economic Thought and Method-ology, 6: 73-89. google scholar
  3. Braun, E., P. Lewin & N. Cachanosky (2016). Ludwig von Mises’s Approach to Capital as a Bridge between Austrian and Institutional Economics, Journal of Institutional Economics, 12 (4): 847-866. google scholar
  4. Caldwell, B. (1989), Austrians and Institutionalists: The Historical Origins of Their Shared Characteristics, Research in the History of Economic Thought and Methodology, 6: 91-100. google scholar
  5. Colander, D. (2000). The Death of Neoclassical Economics, Journal of the History of Economic Thought, 22 (2): 127-143. google scholar
  6. Colander, D., R. Holt & J.B. Jr. Rosser (2004). The Changing Face of Mainstream Economics, Review of Political Economy, 16 (4): 485-499. google scholar
  7. Dekker, E. & P. Kuchar (2019). Lachmann and Shackle: On the Joint Production of Interpretation Instruments, Research in the History of Economic Thought and Methodology, 37B: 25-42. google scholar
  8. Dequech, D. (2007). Neoclassical, Mainstream, Orthodox, and Heterodox Economics, Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, 30 (2): 279-302. google scholar
  9. Dequech, D. (2021). The Future of Heterodox Economics: An Institutional Perspective, Journal of Economic Issues, 55 (3): 578-583. google scholar
  10. Edgell, S. & R. Tilman (1989). The Intellectual Antecedents of Thorstein Veblen: A Reappraisal, Journal of Economic Issues, 23 (4): 1003-1026. google scholar
  11. Foss, N. J. & G. Garzarelli (2007). Institutions as Knowledge Capital: Ludwig M. Lachmann’s Interpretative Institutionalism, Cambridge Journal of Economics, 31 (5): 789-804. google scholar
  12. Granovetter, M. (1985). Economic Action and Social Structure: The Problem of Embeddedness, American Journal of Sociology, 91 (3): 481-510. google scholar
  13. Hedoin, C. (2009). Weber and Veblen on the Rationalization Process, Journal of Economic Issues, 43 (1): 167-188. google scholar
  14. Hodgson, G. M. (1988). Economics and Institutions. Cambridge: Polity Press. google scholar
  15. Hodgson, G. M. (2000). What is the Essence of Institutional Economics?, Journal of Economlc Issues, 34 (2): 317-329. google scholar
  16. Hodgson, G. M. (2006). What Are Institutions?, Journal of Economic Issues, 40 (1): 1-25. google scholar
  17. Hodgson, G. M. (2021), Debating the Future of Heterodox Economics, Journal of Economlc Issues, 55 (3): 603-614. google scholar
  18. Jennings, A. & W. William (1994). Evolutionary Economics and Cultural Hermeneutics: Veblen, Cultural Relativism, and Blind Drift, Journal of Economlc Issues, 28 (4): 997-1030. google scholar
  19. Klein, P. A. (1990), Institutionalism as a School: A Reconsideration, Journal of Economlc Issues, 24 (2): 381-388. google scholar
  20. Koppl, R. (1998), Lachmann on the Subjectivism of Active Minds, Koppl, R. & G. Mongiovi (Ed.), in Subjectlvlsm and Economlc Analysls: Essays ln Memory of Ludwlg M. Lachmann (61-79), London: Routledge. google scholar
  21. Koppl, R. & G. Mongiovi (1998), Introduction, Koppl, R. & G. Mongiovi (Ed.), in Subjectlvlsm and Economlc Analysls: Essays ln Memory of Ludwlg M. Lachmann (1-11), London: Routledge. google scholar
  22. Lachmann, L. M. ([1956] 1978), Capltal and lts Structure, Kansas City: Sheed Andrews and McMeel, INC. google scholar
  23. Lachmann, L. M. (1943). The Role of Expectations in Economics as a Social Science, Economlca, 10 (37): 12-23. google scholar
  24. Lachmann, L. M. (1944). Finance Capitalism?, Economlca, 11 (42): 64-73. google scholar
  25. Lachmann, L. M. (1951). The Science of Human Action, Economica, 18 (72): 412-427. google scholar
  26. Lachmann, L. M. (1962). Cost Inflation and Economic Institutions, The South Afrlcan Journal of Economlcs, 30: 177-186. google scholar
  27. Lachmann, L. M. (1971). The Legacy of Max Weber: Three Essays, Berkeley: The Glendessary Press. google scholar
  28. Lachmann, L. M. (1976). From Mises to Shackle: An Essay on Austrian Economics and the Kaleidic Society, Journal of Economlc Llterature, 14 (1): 54-62. google scholar
  29. Lachmann, L. M. (1990). Austrian Economics: A Hermeneutic Approach, Lavoie, D. (Ed.), ln Economlcs and Hermeneutlcs (132-144), London: Routledge. google scholar
  30. Leathers, C. G. (1990). Veblen and Hayek on Instincts and Evolution, Journal of the Hlstory of Economlc Thought, 12: 162-178. google scholar
  31. Lewis, P. (2008). Solving the “Lachmann Problem”: Orientation, Individualism, and the Causal Explanation of Socioeconomic Order, The Amerlcan Journal of Economlcs and Soclology, 67 (5): 827-858. google scholar
  32. Lewis, P. & J. Runde (2007). Subjectivism, Social Structure and the Possibility of Socioeconomic Order: The Case of Ludwig Lachmann, Journal of Economlc Behavlor & Organlzatlon, 62: 167-186. google scholar
  33. McCloskey, D. N. (2019). Lachmann Practiced Humanomics, Beyond the Dogma of Behaviorism, The Revlew of Austrlan Economlcs, 32: 47-61. google scholar
  34. Mirowski, P. (1987). The Philosophical Bases of Institutionalist Economics, Journal of Economlc Issues, 21 (3): 1001-1038. google scholar
  35. North, D. C. (1990). Instltutlons, Instltutlonal Change and Economlc Performance, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. google scholar
  36. O’Hara, P. A. (2002). The Contemporary Relevance of Thorstein Veblen’s Institutional-Evolutionary Political Economy, Hlstory of Economlcs Revlew, 35 (1): 78-103. google scholar
  37. Özveren, Y. E. (1998), An Institutionalist Alternative to Neoclassical Economics?, Revlew, 21 (4): 469-530. google scholar
  38. Perlman, M. (1986). Subjectivism and American Institutionalism, Kirzner, I. M. (Ed.), in Subjectlvlsm, Intelllglblllty and Economlc Under-standlng (268-280), Hampshire: The Macmillan Press. google scholar
  39. Plotkin, S. & R. Tilman (2011). The Polltlcal Ideas of Thorsteln Veblen, New Haven & London: Yale University Press. google scholar
  40. Prychitko, D. L. (1994). Ludwig Lachmann and the Interpretive Turn in Economics: A Critical Inquiry into the Hermeneutics of the Plan, Advances ln Austrlan Economlcs, 1: 303-319. google scholar
  41. Rothbard, M. N. (1989). The Hermeneutical Invasion of Philosophy and Economics, The Revlew of Austrlan Economlcs, 3: 45-59. google scholar
  42. Rothbard, M. N. (1995), The Present State of Austrian Economics, Journal des Economlstes et des Etudes Humalnes, 6 (1): 43-89. google scholar
  43. Rutherford, M. (1992). Thorstein Veblen and the Problem of the Engineers, Internatlonal Revlew of Soclology, 3 (3): 125-150. google scholar
  44. Rutherford, M. (1994a). Austrian Economics and American (Old) Institutionalism, Boettke, P. J. (Ed.), in The Elgar Companlon to Austrlan Economlcs (529-534), England: Edward Elgar. google scholar
  45. Rutherford, M. (1994b). Instltutlons ln Economlcs, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. google scholar
  46. Rutherford, M. (1998). Veblen’s Evolutionary Programme: A Promise Unfulfilled, Cambrldge Journal of Economlcs, 22: 463-477. google scholar
  47. Samuels, W. J. (1989). Austrian and Institutional Economics: Some Common Elements, Research ln the Hlstory of Economlc Thought and Methodology, 6: 53-71. google scholar
  48. Samuels, W. J. (1990). The Self-Referentiability of Thorstein Veblen’s Theory of the Preconception of Economic Science, Journal of Economlc Issues, 24 (3), 695-718. google scholar
  49. Samuels, W. J. (1993). Thorstein Veblen and the Place of Science, Soclety, 30: 76-82. google scholar
  50. Schumpeter, J. A. ([1954] 2006). Hlstory of Economlc Analysls, London: Routledge. google scholar
  51. Searle, J. R. (2005). What is an Institution?, Journal of Instltutlonal Economlcs, 1 (1): 1-22. google scholar
  52. Stoor, V. H. (2019). Ludwig Lachmann’s Peculiar Status Within Austrian Economics, The Revlew of Austrlan Economlcs, 32: 63-75. google scholar
  53. Taiko, T., F. Almeida & R. G. Fernandez (2020). Thorstein Veblen’s Institutional Economics and Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky’s Behavioral Economics: An Analysis of Convergent Points, Brazlllan Journal of Polltlcal Economy, 40 (4): 746-765. google scholar
  54. Tilman, R. (2004). Karl Mannheim, Max Weber, and the Problem of Social Rationality in Thorstein Veblen, Journal of Economlc Issues, 38 (1): 155-172. google scholar
  55. Torr, C. (2019). Lachmann, Keynes, and Subjectivism, Research ln the Hlstory of Economlc Thought and Methodology, 37b: 69-81. google scholar
  56. Torr, C. S. W. (1992). Lachmann and Hodgson on Institutions, The South Afrlcan Journal of Economlcs, 60 (1): 131-136. google scholar
  57. Vaughn, K. I. (1992). The Problem of Order in Austrian Economics: Kirzner vs. Lachmann, Revlew of Polltlcal Economy, 4 (3): 251-274. google scholar
  58. Veblen, T. ([1899] 2007), The Theory of the Lelsure Class, Oxford, Oxford University Press. google scholar
  59. Veblen, T. ([1919] 1961), The Place of Sclence ln Modern Clvlllsatlon and Other Essays, New York: Russell and Russell. google scholar
  60. Veblen, T. (1898). Why is Economics not an Evolutionary Science? The QuarterlyJournal of Economics, 12 (4): 373-397. google scholar
  61. Veblen, T. (1918), The Instinct of Workmanship and the State of the Industrial Arts, New York: B. W. Huebsch. google scholar
  62. Waller, W. T. (1982). The Evolution of the Veblenian Dichotomy: Veblen, Hamilton, Ayres, and Foster, Journal of Economic Issues, 16 (3): 757-771. google scholar
  63. Weed, F. J. (1981), Interpreting ‘Institutions’ in Veblen’s Evolutionary Theory, The American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 40 (1): 67-78. google scholar
  64. Wynarczyk, P. (1992). Comparing Alleged Incommensurables: Institutional and Austrian Economics as Rivals and Possible Complements?, Review of Political Economy, 4 (1): 18-36. google scholar
  65. Yılmaz, F. (2007). Veblen and the Problem of Rationality, Journal of Economic Issues, 41 (3): 841-862. google scholar