Premium
Individualism and Institutionalism Revisited: A Response to Professor Bush
Author(s) -
Seckler David W.
Publication year - 1981
Publication title -
american journal of economics and sociology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.199
H-Index - 38
eISSN - 1536-7150
pISSN - 0002-9246
DOI - 10.1111/j.1536-7150.1981.tb01659.x
Subject(s) - individualism , veblen good , institutionalism , capitalism , collectivism , normative , methodological individualism , historicism , sociology , positive economics , neoclassical economics , philosophy , epistemology , law , economics , political science , politics
A bstract . In the book which provoked individualist/institutionalist controversy in several journals, including this one, the author emphasized aspects of “muddled” thinking in the work of Clarence E. Ayres which he believes has brought forth neo‐institutionalist contributions that are a “hodge‐podge.” Neo‐institutionalism, he is convinced, is a form of historicism in Karl R. Popper's terms. Lord Robbins is quoted to prove that individualists do not necessarily espouse laissez‐faire capitalism and extreme income inequality. F. A. Hayek is a conservative but some individualists are socialists. The distinction on which individualists base interpersonal comparisons of utility is not between normative and positive but between science and philosophy; Thorstein Veblen never attempted to build a bridge between science and value. The real issue between individualists and neo‐institutionalists is individualism vs. collectivism.