The Economy as Instituted Process - Revision history

Santiago Pinault at 20:03, 5 September 2019

2019-09-05T20:03:01Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:03, 5 September 2019
Line 14:		Line 14:

	== The Formal and the Substantive Meanings of “Economic” ==		== The Formal and the Substantive Meanings of “Economic” ==
			{{Page \|n°=250}} The human economy, then, is embedded and enmeshed in institutions, economic and noneconomics. The inclusion of the noneconomic is vital. For religion or government may be as important for the structure and functionings of the economy as monetary institutions or the availability of tools and machines themselves that lighten the toil of labor.

	== Reciprocity, Redistribution, and Exchange ==		== Reciprocity, Redistribution, and Exchange ==

Santiago Pinault at 23:41, 27 June 2019

2019-06-27T23:41:43Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:41, 28 June 2019
Line 11:		Line 11:
	The two meanings of “economic”, the substantive and the formal, have nothing in common. The later derives from logic, the former from fact. […]		The two meanings of “economic”, the substantive and the formal, have nothing in common. The later derives from logic, the former from fact. […]

	{{Page \|n°=244}} […] Menger alone in his posthumous work criticized the term, but neither he nor Max Weber, nor Talcott Parsons after him, apprehended the significance of the distinction for sociological analysis. Indeed, there seemed to be no valid reason for distinguished between two root meanings of a term which, as we said, were bound to coincide in practice.		{{Page \|n°=244}} […] Laymen accepted this compound concept as a matter of course; a Marshall, Pareto or Durckheim equally adhered to it. Menger alone in his posthumous work criticized the term, but neither he nor Max Weber, nor Talcott Parsons after him, apprehended the significance of the distinction for sociological analysis. Indeed, there seemed to be no valid reason for distinguished between two root meanings of a term which, as we said, were bound to coincide in practice.

	== The Formal and the Substantive Meanings of “Economic” ==		== The Formal and the Substantive Meanings of “Economic” ==

Santiago Pinault at 23:16, 27 June 2019

2019-06-27T23:16:04Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:16, 28 June 2019
Line 11:		Line 11:
	The two meanings of “economic”, the substantive and the formal, have nothing in common. The later derives from logic, the former from fact. […]		The two meanings of “economic”, the substantive and the formal, have nothing in common. The later derives from logic, the former from fact. […]

	{{Page \|n°=244}} […] Menger alone in his posthumous work criticized the term, but neither he nor Max Weber, nor Talcott Parsons after him, apprehended the significance of the distinction for sociological analysis		{{Page \|n°=244}} […] Menger alone in his posthumous work criticized the term, but neither he nor Max Weber, nor Talcott Parsons after him, apprehended the significance of the distinction for sociological analysis. Indeed, there seemed to be no valid reason for distinguished between two root meanings of a term which, as we said, were bound to coincide in practice.

	== The Formal and the Substantive Meanings of “Economic” ==		== The Formal and the Substantive Meanings of “Economic” ==

Santiago Pinault at 10:06, 21 June 2019

2019-06-21T10:06:05Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:06, 21 June 2019
Line 1:		Line 1:
	__TOC__		__TOC__

	{{Page \|n°=243}} Our main purpose in this chapter is to determine the meaning that can be attached with consistency to the term “economic” in all the social sciences.		{{Page \|n°=243}}<ref>Original 1957 edition's pagination.</ref> Our main purpose in this chapter is to determine the meaning that can be attached with consistency to the term “economic” in all the social sciences.

	The simple recognition from which all such attempts must start is the fact that in referring to human activities the term economic is compound of two meanings that have independent roots. We will call them the substantive and the formal meaning.		The simple recognition from which all such attempts must start is the fact that in referring to human activities the term economic is compound of two meanings that have independent roots. We will call them the substantive and the formal meaning.
Line 10:		Line 10:

	The two meanings of “economic”, the substantive and the formal, have nothing in common. The later derives from logic, the former from fact. […]		The two meanings of “economic”, the substantive and the formal, have nothing in common. The later derives from logic, the former from fact. […]

			{{Page \|n°=244}} […] Menger alone in his posthumous work criticized the term, but neither he nor Max Weber, nor Talcott Parsons after him, apprehended the significance of the distinction for sociological analysis

	== The Formal and the Substantive Meanings of “Economic” ==		== The Formal and the Substantive Meanings of “Economic” ==

Santiago Pinault: /* Text Informations */

2019-04-10T01:27:44Z

Text Informations

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:27, 10 April 2019
Line 26:		Line 26:
	== Text Informations ==		== Text Informations ==
	'''Reference''': <br />		'''Reference''': <br />
	'''Original Publication''': “The Economy as Instituted Process”, chap. XIII of ''[[Trade and Market in the Early Empires]]'', p. 243-270<br />		'''Original Publication''': “The Economy as Instituted Process”, chap. XIII of ''[[Trade and Market in the Early Empires]]'' ([[1957]]), p. 243-270<br />
	'''KPA''': [[34/16]]<br />		'''KPA''': [[34/16]]<br />
	'''~~French Translation~~''': « [[L’économie en tant que procès institutionnalisé]] »~~, chap. 2 des ''[[Essais de Karl Polanyi]]'', p. 53-78~~		'''Other Languages''':
			{\|class="wikitable"
			! Lge
			! Name
			\|-
			\| DE
			\|
			\|-
			\| FR
			\| « [[L’économie en tant que procès institutionnalisé]] »
			\|}

Santiago Pinault: /* Text Informations */

2019-02-13T17:26:16Z

Text Informations

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:26, 13 February 2019
Line 26:		Line 26:
	== Text Informations ==		== Text Informations ==
	'''Reference''': <br />		'''Reference''': <br />
	'''Original Publication''': “The Economy as Instituted Process”, chap. XIII de'' Trade and Market in the Early Empires'', p. 243-270<br />		'''Original Publication''': “The Economy as Instituted Process”, chap. XIII of ''[[Trade and Market in the Early Empires]]'', p. 243-270<br />
	'''KPA''': <br />		'''KPA''': [[34/16]]<br />
	'''French Translation''': « L’économie en tant que procès institutionnalisé », chap. 2 des ''[[Essais de Karl Polanyi]]'', p. 53-78		'''French Translation''': « [[L’économie en tant que procès institutionnalisé]] », chap. 2 des ''[[Essais de Karl Polanyi]]'', p. 53-78

Santiago Pinault: /* 1. Forms of Trae */

2018-03-23T02:02:02Z

1. Forms of Trae

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:02, 23 March 2018
Line 17:		Line 17:
	== Forms of Trade, Money Uses, and Market Elements ==		== Forms of Trade, Money Uses, and Market Elements ==

	=== 1. Forms of ~~Trae~~ ===		=== 1. Forms of Trade ===

	=== 2. Money uses ===		=== 2. Money uses ===

Santiago Pinault at 02:01, 23 March 2018

2018-03-23T02:01:47Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:01, 23 March 2018
Line 1:		Line 1:
			__TOC__

	{{Page \|n°=243}} Our main purpose in this chapter is to determine the meaning that can be attached with consistency to the term “economic” in all the social sciences.		{{Page \|n°=243}} Our main purpose in this chapter is to determine the meaning that can be attached with consistency to the term “economic” in all the social sciences.

Santiago Pinault at 02:01, 23 March 2018

2018-03-23T02:01:17Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:01, 23 March 2018
Line 8:		Line 8:

	The two meanings of “economic”, the substantive and the formal, have nothing in common. The later derives from logic, the former from fact. […]		The two meanings of “economic”, the substantive and the formal, have nothing in common. The later derives from logic, the former from fact. […]

			== The Formal and the Substantive Meanings of “Economic” ==

			== Reciprocity, Redistribution, and Exchange ==

			== Forms of Trade, Money Uses, and Market Elements ==

			=== 1. Forms of Trae ===

			=== 2. Money uses ===

			=== 3. Market Elements ===


	== Text Informations ==		== Text Informations ==

Santiago Pinault at 01:58, 23 March 2018

2018-03-23T01:58:02Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:58, 23 March 2018
Line 1:		Line 1:
			{{Page \|n°=243}} Our main purpose in this chapter is to determine the meaning that can be attached with consistency to the term “economic” in all the social sciences.

			The simple recognition from which all such attempts must start is the fact that in referring to human activities the term economic is compound of two meanings that have independent roots. We will call them the substantive and the formal meaning.

			The substantive meaning of economic derives from man's dependence for his living upon nature and his fellows. It refers to the interchange with his natural and social environment, in so far as this results in supplying him with the means of material want satisfaction.

			The formal meaning of economic derives from the logical character of the means-ends relationship, as apparent in such words as “economical” or “economizing”. It refers to a definite situation of choice; namely, that between the different uses of means induced by an insufficiency of those means. If we call, the rules governing choice of means of logic of rational action, then we may denote this variant of logic, with an improvised term, as formal economics.

			The two meanings of “economic”, the substantive and the formal, have nothing in common. The later derives from logic, the former from fact. […]

	== Text Informations ==		== Text Informations ==