Veblen’in İktisat Sosyolojisinin Sosyal Ve Kavramsal İlişkisellik Üzerinden Düşünülmesi

Yıl 2019, , 209 - 222, 30.11.2019

Derya Güler Aydın Bahar Araz

https://doi.org/10.51803/yssr.591143

Öz

Özet

Bu çalışmanın amacı, önemli bir eski kurumsal iktisatçı
olan Veblen’in çalışmalarının iktisat sosyolojisine sosyal ve kavramsal
ilişkisellik üzerinden dahil edilebileceği düşüncesidir. Çalışmada, aynı
zamanda sosyolojik kavramlar olan kültür, alışkanlık, içgüdü, gösteriş
tüketiminden yola çıkılarak, Veblen’in iktisat sosyolojisi yaklaşımı ele
alınacaktır.

Veblen'in analizinde iktisadi alanın toplumsal alana
gömülü olduğunu ve toplum ve bireyin ilişkiselliğinin dikkate alınması
gerektiği  ileri sürülebilir. Bu, aynı
zamanda sosyal ontolojinin ayırtedici bir özelliği olup, Veblen’in yöntem
tercihinin de bir sonucudur. Bu bağlamda çalışma, sosyal ontoloji temelinde,
Veblen’in iktisat sosyolojisinin kavramsal ilişkisel yönüne de dikkat çekmekte
ve böylece Veblen’in iktisat sosyolojini gözler önüne sermektedir.

 

            Anahtar Kelimeler: Veblen’in
İktisat Sosyolojisi, Sosyal Ontoloji, Kavramsal İlişkisellik

            JEL Kodu: B0-B3

Abstract:

The aim of this study is that
Veblen, an important old institutional economist, can be included in the
economic sociology through social and conceptual relationality. In this study,
Veblen’s economic sociology will be discussed by sociological concepts such as
culture, habit, instinct and conspicious consumption.

In Veblen's analysis, it can be
argued that the economic sphere is embedded in the social sphere and the
relationship between the society and the individual should be taken into
consideration. This distinctive feature of social ontology is a result of
Veblen's methodology. Within this frame, the study draws attention to the
conceptual relationality aspect of Veblen's economic sociology on the basis of
social ontology and thus reveals Veblen's economic sociology.

Keywords: Economic Sociology of
Veblen, Social ontology, relationality.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Veblen’in İktisat Sosyolojisi, Sosyal Ontololoji, Kavramsal İlişkisellik

Kaynakça

• Archer, M. 1995. Realist Social Theory: The Morphogenetic Approach. Cambridge University Press, The UK.
• Archer, M. 2000. Being Human:The Problem of Agency, Cambridge University Press, The UK.
• Bhaskar, R. 1975. Realist Theory of Science. Leeds Books.
• Bhaskar, R. 1989. The Possibility of Naturalism: A Philosophical Critique of the Contemporary Human Science, Third Edition. London: Routledge.
• Davis, J. B. 2016. Lawson on Veblen on Social Ontology, Jamie Morgan (der.) “What is Neoclassical Economics?: Debating The Origins, Meaning and Significance”, Routledge, London.
• Dewey, J, 1922. Human Nature and Conduct: An Introduction of Social Psyhchology, Henry Hold and Company, New York.
• Diggins, P.J. 1977. “Animism and the Origins of Alienation: The Anthropological Perspective of Thorstein Veblen”, History and Theory, 16(2), 113-36.
• Durkheim, E. [1893] 1984. The Division of Labor in Society. New York: Free Press.
• Edgell, S. 2006. “Thorstein Veblen’s Theory of Evolutionary Change”, American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 34(3), 267-280.
• Hodgson, G. 1997. “Economics and Evolution and the Evolution of Economics” Reijnders J (der), Economics and Evolution, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
• Hodgson, G, 2004. “Veblen and Darwinism”, International Review of Sociology, 14(3): 343-361.
• Hodgson, G, 2006. “What are Institutions”, Journal of Economic Issues, XL(1): 1-25.
• Hodgson, G, 2007. “Instinct and Habit Before Reason: Comparing the views of John Dewey, Friedrich Hayek and Thorstein Veblen”, Advances in Austrian Economics, 9: 109-143. Griffen, R., A. Karayiannis (2002) “T. Veblen’s Evolutionary Theory of Entrepreneurship”, History of Economic Ideas, 10(3), 61-83.
• Güler Aydın D. ve B. Araz 2013. “Kapitalizmin Şövalyeleri ve Sanayi Kaptanları Üzerine” Hacettepe Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 31(2): 153-165.
• Güler Aydın D. ve B. Araz 2017. “Janus’un İkı̇ Yüzü: Yabancılaşma ve Gösterı̇ş Tüketı̇mı̇”, Hacettepe Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 35(1): 1-18.
• Güler Aydın D. ve I. İmer 2017. “At the Crossroads of History and Theory: Weber, Schumpeter and EconomicSociology", Panoeconomicus, http://doiserbia.nb.rs/issue.aspx?issueid=2794&AspxAutoDetectCookieSupport=1,
• Güler Aydın, D. 2018. J.A Schumpeter’in İktisat Sosyolojisi: Emperyalizmler, Toplumsal Sınıflar ve Kurumsal Dönüşüm”, İktisat Sosyolojisi, A. Eren ve E. Kırmızıaltın (der.), Heretik, Ankara.
• Lawson, T. 1997. Economics and Reality, London: Routledge.
• Lawson, T. 2003. Reorienting Economics, London: Routledge.
• Lawson, T. 2005. “The (confused) State Equilibrium Analysis in Modern Economics: An Explanation”, Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, 27(3): 423–444. Lawson, T. 2009. “The Current Economic Crisis: Its Nature and the Course of Academic Economics”, Cambridge Journal of Economics, 33: 759–77.
• Lawson, T. 2012. “Ontology and the Study of Social Reality: Emergence, Organisation, Community, Power, Social Relations, Corporations, Artefacts and Money”, Cambridge Journal of Economics, 36: 345–85.
• Lawson, T. 2013. “Emergence and Morphogenesis: Causal Reduction and Downward Causation?”, M. Archer (Der.), Social Morphogenesis: 61-84. Springer, Dordrecht.
• Lawson, T, 2015a, "Process, Order and Stability in Veblen," Cambridge Journal of Economics, 39(4), 993-1030.
• Lawson, T. 2015b. “A Conception of Social Ontology”, S. Pratten, (Der.), Social ontology and modern economics: 19-53. London: Routledge.
• Latsis, J. 2010. “Veblen on the Machine Process and Technological Change”, Cambridge Journal of Economics, 34(4), 601-615
• Martins, N. O. 2007. “Realism, Universalism and Capabilities”, Review of Social Economy, 3: 253–78.
• Martins, N. O. 2014. The Cambridge Revival of Political Economy. London and New York: Routledge. Martins.
• Martins N. O. 2017. “Critical Ethical Naturalism and theTtransformation of Economics”, Cambridge Journal of Economics, 41: 1323-1342.
• Marx, K. ve Engels, F. (1848) 2014. The Communist Manifesto. Penguin Books, London: UK.
• Marx, K. (1857-58) 1973. Grundrisse: Foundations of the Critique of Political Economy. New York: Vintage Books.
• P. Vilfredo. (1916) 1963. The Mind and Society: A Treatise on General Sociology. 2 vols. New York: Dover.
• Parsons, T., and N. J. Smelser. 1956. Economy and Society: A Study in the Integration of Economic and Social Theory. New York: Free Press.
• Pratten, S. 2015. “The Scope of Ontological Theorising”. S. Pratten (Der.), Social Ontology and Modern Economics, Routledge, London, 68-94.
• Polanyi, K. [1944] 1957. The Great Transformation. Boston: Beacon Hill.
• Schumpeter, J. A. 1943. Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy, George Allen and Unwin Ltd., London.
• Schumpeter, J. A. 1954. History of Economic Analysis. London Allen and Unvin.
• Schumpeter, J.A. 1991. “The Crisis of the Tax State”, R. Swedberg (der.), Joseph A. Schumpeter: The Economics and Sociology of Capitalism içinde, N.J- Princeton: Princeton University Press, 99-140.
• Searle, J. R. 1995. The Construction of Social Reality. Penguin, London.
• Searle, J.R. 2010. Making The Social World, Oxford University Press. The UK
• Simmel, Georg. 1909. “The Problem of Sociology.” American Journal of Sociology, 15(3): 289-320.
• Smelser, N. J. and R. Swedberg. 2005. “Introducing Economic Sociology.” In The Handbook of Economic Sociology, Second Edition, eds. Neil J. Smelser and Richard Swedberg, 3-25, Princeton: Princeton University Press.
• Sombart, W. 1902–27. Der Moderne Kapitalismus. 3 vols. Leipzig: Duncker und Humblot.
• Sombart, W. 1930. Die Drei Nationakökonomien. Geschichte und System der Lehre von der Wirtschaft. Leipzig: Duncker und Humblot.
• Sombart, W. 1935. Das ökonomische Zeitalter. Berlin: Buchholz und Weisswange.
• Veblen, T.B. 1884. “Kant’s Critique of Judgement” as reprinted in The Collected Works of Thorstein Veblen, Vol 10, Routledge, London.
• Veblen, T.B. 1898a. “Why is Economics Not an Evolutionary Science”, Quarterly Journal Of Economics, 12, 4: 373-397.
• Veblen, T.B. 1898b 1914. ‘The Instinct of Workmanship and the Irksomeness of Labor’,as reprinted in The Collected Works of Thorstein Veblen, Vol 10, Routledge, London.
• Veblen T.B. 1899. The Theory of the Leisure Class, as reprinted in The Collected Works of Thorstein Veblen, Vol 1, Routledge, London.
• Veblen T.B. 1909. “The Limitations Marginal Utility”, Journal of Political Economy, Vol.17 No.9, 620-636.
• Veblen T.B. 1946. The Instinct of Workmanship: And the State of the Industrial Arts, New York: The Viking Press.
• Veblen, T.B. 1964. “The Place of Science in Modern Civilization” in W. Mitchell (ed), What Veblen Taught: Selected Writings of Thorstein Veblen, 1936, New York: A.M. Kelley.
• Veblen, T.B. 1964. Absentee Ownership and Business Enterprise in Recent Times, New York: Augustus M. Kelley, Bookseller, 1923.
• Veblen, T.B. 1965. The Engineers and The Price System, New York: A.M. Kelley.
• Veblen, T.B. 1975. The Theory of Business Enterprise, New Jersey: A.M. Kelley.
• Veblen Thorstein. B. 1990. “The Preconceptions of Economic Science I-II-III”, içinde The Place of Science in Modern Civilization and Other Essays, New York, Huebsch, (1919), 82-179.
• Waller, 1998. "The Concept of Habit in Economic Analysis," Journal of Economic Issues, vol. 22(1), pages 113-126.
• Weber, M. 1997. The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism (translated by Zeynep Aruoba). İstanbul: Hil Yayın.