scholarly journals 200 Years To Political Economy in Vilnius University

Ekonomika ◽  
2004 ◽  
Vol 65 ◽  
Author(s):  
Egidija Laumenskaitė

This paper gives a concise overview of the development of the economic thought in Lithuania mentioning the very special event in the history of the economic science - the establishment of the Department of Political Economy in Vilnius University in 1803 as the first Department of Political Economy in the world.

2005 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 95-120
Author(s):  
Egidija Laumenskaitė

Economic thought in Lithuania has comparatively deep historical roots and some special achievements to its credit. The establishment of the Department of Political Economy at the University of Vilnius in 1803 was the first such high recognition of the physiocrats’ concept in the history of economic science. The reasons for physiocracy to appear as a syllabus subject at Vilnius University were rooted not only in the specific character of the country’s economy and educational system, but also in the ideological prehistory of the discipline. The turn of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries marked the first period of vigorous development in economic thought in Lithuania and coincided with the development of economic ideas at Vilnius University, established in 1579. Rapid changes in economic life and the widespread Reformation movement in the mid-sixteenth century gave birth to active debates on social and economic issues. At that time the Grand Duchy of Lithuania was not merely following the development of economic ideas of the West (which was the fact later, especially with the upsurge in the economic thought in the twentieth century), but also disputing them (although the scope of this polemic was noticeably slender) and looking for solutions to the country’s keenest economic problems. The economic ideas of Jan Abramowicz, Marcin Smiglecki and others are worth consideration in the context of the development of European economic thought as a whole. The educational reforms at Vilnius University at the end of the eighteenth century (from Vilnius Academy, managed by Jesuits, to a more open educational institution) gave a birth to a new upsurge of economic thought in Lithuania. Vilnius University adopted the new discipline of Political Economy. Professors Hieronim Stroynowski, Jan Waszkewicz, and Michał Oczapowski started developing various courses in economics. However, after the Uprising of 1831 the University of Vilnius was closed down and further development of economic thought was restricted for almost a century. The unsteady evolution of economic thought in Lithuania in the period under review is connected with the country’s general economic and political development.


2012 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 81-96 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ben Fine ◽  
Dimitris Milonakis

AbstractIn this response to the symposium on our two books we try to deal as fully as possible in the brief space available with most of the major issues raised by our distinguished commentators. Although at least three of them are in agreement with the main thrust of the arguments put forward in our books, they all raise important issues relating to methodology, the history of economic thought (including omissions), and a number of more specific issues. Our answer is based on the restatement of the chief purpose of our two books, describing the intellectual history of the evolution of economic science emphasising the role of the excision of the social and the historical from economic theorising in the transition from (classical) political economy to (neoclassical) economics, only for the two to be reunited through the vulgar form of economics imperialism following the monolithic dominance of neoclassical economics at the expense of pluralism after the Second World War. The importance of political economy for the future of economic science is vigorously argued for.


2018 ◽  
pp. 95-110
Author(s):  
L. D. Shirokorad

This article shows how representatives of various theoretical currents in economics at different times in history interpreted the efforts of Nikolay Sieber in defending and developing Marxian economic theory and assessed his legacy and role in forming the Marxist school in Russian political economy. The article defines three stages in this process: publication of Sieber’s work dedicated to the analysis of the first volume of Marx’s Das Kapital and criticism of it by Russian opponents of Marxian economic theory; assessment of Sieber’s work by the narodniks, “Legal Marxists”, Georgiy Plekhanov, and Vladimir Lenin; the decline in interest in Sieber in light of the growing tendency towards an “organic synthesis” of the theory of marginal utility and the Marxist social viewpoint.


2019 ◽  
pp. 135-145
Author(s):  
Viktor A. Popov

Deep comprehension of the advanced economic theory, the talent of lecturer enforced by the outstanding working ability forwarded Vladimir Geleznoff scarcely at the end of his thirties to prepare the publication of “The essays of the political economy” (1898). The subsequent publishing success (8 editions in Russia, the 1918­-year edition in Germany) sufficiently demonstrates that Geleznoff well succeded in meeting the intellectual inquiry of the cross­road epoch of the Russian history and by that taking the worthful place in the history of economic thought in Russia. Being an acknowledged historian of science V. Geleznoff was the first and up to now one of the few to demonstrate the worldwide community of economists the theoretically saturated view of Russian economic thought in its most fruitful period (end of XIX — first quarter of XX century).


Author(s):  
Alessandro Stanziani

The history of political-economic thought has been built up over the centuries with a uniform focus on European and North American thinkers. Intellectuals beyond the North Atlantic have been largely understood as the passive recipients of already formed economic categories and arguments. This view has often been accepted not only by scholars and observers in Europe but also in many other places such as Russia, India, China, Japan, and the Ottoman Empire. In this regard, the articles included in this collection explicitly differentiate from this diffusionist approach (“born in Western Europe, then flowed everywhere else”).


1946 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 121-152 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dudley Dillard

Although we still live in the shadow of the years between the First and the Second World Wars, already it seems quite clear that future historians of economic thought will regard John Maynard Keynes as the outstanding economist of this turbulent period. As one writer has recently said, “The rapid and widespread adoption of the Keynesian theory by contemporary economists, particularly by those who at first were highly critical, will probably be recorded in the future history of economic thought as an extraordinary happening.” Book after book by leading economists acknowledges a heavy debt to the stimulating thought of Lord Keynes. The younger generation of economists, especially those whose thinking matured during the great depression of the thirties, have been particularly influenced by him.


2019 ◽  
Vol 27 (2) ◽  
pp. 208-214
Author(s):  
Benjamin Anders

This debates essay offers a summary and critique of the chapter “Cheap Energy” in A History of the World in Seven Cheap Things by Jason W Moore and Raj Patel. In the text of my comment, I suggest that this work—while intellectually generative—pays insufficient attention to broader analytical and theoretical debates within Global Political Economy and the study of science and technology that its analysis addresses. Additionally, the authors do not address the failure of the only major attempt to jettison the price mechanism as a system for allocating resources under conditions of industrialization—the Marxist-Leninist command economies—to generate anything approaching a sustainable society.


2008 ◽  
Vol 42 (2-3) ◽  
pp. 283-315 ◽  
Author(s):  
NILE GREEN

AbstractThis essay examines a series of ‘Hindustani’ meditation manuals from the high colonial period against a sample of etiquette and medicinal works from the same era. In doing so, the essay has two principal aims, one specific to the Indian past and one pertaining to more general historical enquiry. The first aim is to subvert a longstanding trend in the ‘history’ of religions which has understood meditational practices through a paradigm of the mystical and transcendent. In its place, the essay examines such practices—and in particular their written, and printed, formulation—within the ideological and technological contexts in which they were written. In short, meditation is historicised, and its ‘Hindu’ and ‘Muslim’ expressions, compared in the process. The second aim is more ambitious: to test the limits of historical knowledge by asking whether it is possible to recount a history of breathing. In reassembling a political economy of respiration from a range of colonial writings, the essay thus hopes to form a listening device for the intimate rhythms of corporeal history. In doing so, it may suggest ways to recount a connected and necessarily political history of the body, the spirit and the world.


2019 ◽  
Vol 17 (33) ◽  
pp. 96
Author(s):  
Hatmansyah Hatmansyah

The Umayyah dynasty became a major force in the development of propaganda spread throughout the world as well as being one of the first centers of political, cultural and scientific studies in the world since the Middle Ages. At the height of its greatness, its success in expanding Islamic power was far greater than that of the Roman empire. The history of Islamic preaching in the Umayyah Dynasty can be divided into two periods in the dynasty era in Damascus and in Cordoba. Islamic da'wah at this time was carried out in three stages, first the expansion of the da'wah area, the second was the development of science and the third was economic thought.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document