Eugen Maria Schulak and Herbert Unterköfler, The Austrian School of Economics: A History of Its Ideas, Ambassadors, and Institutions (Auburn, AL: The Ludwig von Mises Institute, 2011), pp. 244, $17.00. ISBN 978-1-610-16134-3.

2012 ◽  
Vol 34 (2) ◽  
pp. 285-287 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew McCaffrey
2021 ◽  
pp. 13-35
Author(s):  
María Blanco González

Neuroeconomics and Evolutionary Psychology contribution to the economic mainstream along the last decade, not only in the realm of economic theory but in the analysis of risk aversion and financial decisions, is really noteworthy. But few things has been said about how these new disciplines are complementary or has something to add to what the economists thought before us. The comparison between the history of economic ideas and the new disciplines of neuroeconomics and evolutionary psychology is missing. In this article an approach is made to the theories of Ludwig von Mises, one of the most renowned members of the Austrian School of Economics. Key words: History of Economic Thought, Austrian School of Economics, neuroeconomics, Evolutionary Psychology, Ludwig von Mises. JEL Classification: B53, D87. Resumen: La aportación, a lo largo de la última década, de la neuroeconomía y la psicología evolucionista a la visión de la ortodoxia, no solamente en el ámbito de la teoría económica, sino también en el estudio del riesgo y las finanzas, es notable. Pero no hay muchos estudios que analicen comparativa-mente cómo complementan o no las ideas de los autores que nos precedieron. En este artículo se estudian algunos aspectos relacionados con las teorías de Ludwig von Mises, uno de los principales representantes de la Escuela Austriaca. Palabras clave: Historia del Pensamiento Económico, Escuela Austriaca de Economía, Neuroeconomía, Economía Evolucionista, Ludwig von Mises. Clasificación JEL: B53, D87.


Author(s):  
Christopher Westley ◽  
William L. Anderson ◽  
Scott A. Kjar

The Austrian school of economics is generally considered an antiwar school. The Austrian view is not derived from a religious or class-based ideological viewpoints, but instead derives entirely from the school's fundamental economic tenets. This article examines the writings of Ludwig von Mises and Friedrich von Hayek as they relate to war and the causes of war. (A predecessor article on Carl Menger, Eugen von Böhm-Bawerk, and Friedrich von Wieser, the founders of the Austrian School, appeared in vol. 5, no. 1 of this journal.)


2014 ◽  
Vol 31 (7-8) ◽  
pp. 299-302 ◽  
Author(s):  
William Davies

This commentary responds to Nicholas Gane’s article on the early history of neoliberalism. Gane contends that many histories, Foucault’s in particular, do not account for the very earliest period of neoliberal thought, during the 1920s, which was dominated by Ludwig von Mises. Gane also argues that by ignoring this period, critical scholars have misidentified the critical distantiation from John Stuart Mill that was definitive for early neoliberalism. In response to Gane, this piece argues, partly in defence of Foucault, that the key moments in the history of neoliberalism (and liberalism) concern the penetration of economic rationalities into the state. Hence, while the history of economics has intrinsic merits, figures such as Mill may be less significant for the shaping of political rationalities.


2021 ◽  
pp. 173-215
Author(s):  
Patrick Reimers

This paper evaluates and compares the main philosophic and economic thoughts of the two great liberal minds Michael Polanyi and Friedrich A. von Hayek in regards to the concept of a ‘spontaneous order’. In several of their books and papers, both Michal Polanyi (1941, 1948, 1951) and F.A. von Hayek (1944, 1945, 1964, 1973) strongly emphasised on the impossibility of socialism and the superiority of a free market versus public interventionism. Both highlighted their conviction that central planning cannot be more efficient than a spontaneous order, since knowledge is dispersed (Hayek) and tacit (Polanyi). Although both shared very similar concerns in regards to economic matters, they did not always come to the same conclusions. Thus, also the differences between Polanyi’s and Hayek’s concepts will be discussed, such as Polanyi’s emphasis on defending subsystems as the basic units of society, and his focus on maximizing “public freedom”. Both came to different conclusions in regards to the institutional character of science, and even concluded somewhat differently on the character of knowledge. Most importantly, they developed different concepts on political economy and the ideal role of the State. Moreover, this paper will consider the impact of M. Polanyi on the concept of polycentricity and on the ideas of Elinor Ostrom, while also referring to the different understanding of the role of the State in the ideas of F.A. Hayek compared to other Austrian School economists, such as Murray N. Rothbard. In addition, the paper pretends to historically analyse the emergence of the term ‘spontaneous order’, showing that it is not the product of one mind’s design, but the consequence of the thoughts of several great minds, such as Carl Menger, Ludwig von Mises, F.A. von Hayek, Michael Polanyi, Walter Eucken, and Wilhelm Röpke. Keywords: liberalism, libertarianism, capitalism, Austrian school of economics, interventionism, collectivism, spontaneous order, dynamic efficiency, free market economy, polycentricity, catallactics, extended order, tacit knowledge, dispersed knowledge, F.A. Hayek, Michael Polanyi JEL Classification: A12, B10, B13, B25, H10, H40, K11, P10, P14, P16, P26, P48, P51 Resumen: Este artículo evalúa y compara los principales pensamientos económicos y filosóficos de las dos grandes mentes liberales Michael Polanyi y Friedrich A. von Hayek con respecto al concepto del orden espontáneo. En sus obras principales, tanto Michael Polanyi (1941, 1948, 1951) como F.A. von Hayek (1944, 1945, 1964, 1973) destacaron fuertemente la imposibilidad del socialismo y la superioridad de un mercado libre versus el intervencionismo público. Ambos estaban convencidos de que la planificación central no puede ser más eficiente que un orden espontáneo, ya que el conocimiento es disperso (Hayek) y tácito (Polanyi). Aunque ambos compartían preocupaciones muy similares con respecto a los asuntos económicos, no siempre llegaron a las mismas conclusiones. Por lo tanto, también se discutirán las diferencias entre los conceptos de Polanyi y Hayek, como el énfasis de Polanyi en defender los sub-sistemas como unidades básicas de la sociedad y su enfoque en maximizar la “libertad pública”. Ambos llegaron a conclusiones diferentes con respecto al carácter institucional de la ciencia y al carácter del conocimiento. Además, este artículo considerará sus diferentes conceptos sobre economía política y el papel ideal del Estado, y analiza el impacto de M. Polanyi en el concepto de policentrismo y en las ideas de Elinor Ostrom. Por otra parte, el artículo pretende analizar históricamente la aparición del término “orden espontáneo”, mostrando que no es producto del diseño de una sola mente, sino la consecuencia de los pensamientos de varias grandes mentes, como Carl Menger, Ludwig von Mises, FA von Hayek, Michael Polanyi, Walter Eucken y Wilhelm Röpke. Palabras clave: liberalismo, libertarismo, capitalismo, escuela austriaca de economía, intervencionismo, colectivismo, orden espontáneo, eficiencia dinámica, economía de libre mercado, policentrismo, orden extendido, conocimiento tácito, conocimiento disperso, F.A. Hayek, Michael Polanyi Clasificación JEL: A12, B10, B13, B25, H10, H40, K11, P10, P14, P16, P26, P48, P51


Author(s):  
Lucas Casonato

Abstract This paper analyzes the presence of Israel Kirzner in the History of Economic Thought and focusing on his professional engagement with other economists. His academic trajectory is contextualized on three milestones of the recent history of the Austrian School. The first one is the ending of the socialist economic calculation debate, when the Austrian was considered unconvincing due to the economics’ shift to a general equilibrium model of the economy; in the aftermath of the debate, Kirzner entered at the New York University’s PhD program and was mentored by Ludwig von Mises. At this point, Kirzner started to develop his ideas on entrepreneurship and to aim an audience wider than his Austrian peers. The second is the Austrian Revival in the 1970s, in which the prestigious recovery stage of the Austrian School, thanks to Kirzner assuming a leadership role in the process. The third is in the 1980s, when a more consolidated Austrian School attempts to define itself, as Kirzner retains an Austrian vision founded on the synthesis between Mises and Hayek. It is concluded that Kirzner’s professional engagement was fundamental in the recovery of Austrian theory. He communicated Austrian ideas to a wider audience and synthetized Misesian and Hayekian proposals on the market process. These efforts allow us to recognize a Kirznerian view of the Austrian School, established with the traditional microeconomic theory, but including greater subjectivity on the interpretation of economic phenomena, becoming a more general, more realistic theory.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document