The metaphysics of business: Thorstein Veblen

International Journal of Politics, Culture and Society

Volumn 11, Issue 4, 1998, Pages 541-578

  Wenzler, John ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33744528650     PISSN: 08914486     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1023/A:1025149222275     Document Type: Article

References (72)

1. Thorstein Veblen, The Theory of the Leisure Class (New York, 1899), pp. 98-99.
2. Casual readers and critics of Veblen are not the only people who dismiss his claims of moral neutrality. See, for example, Rick Tilman, the most prolific student/admirer of Veblen writing today. In a recent essay on Veblen, Tilman argued that: "Veblen's theory of institutional change had a potent normative component. ⋯ Conventional economics has been heavily influenced by the radical ethical relativism and moral agnosticism inherent in neoclassical economics. The Veblenian position thus provides a clear alternative, with its normladen focus on the desirability of particular values." See "Some Recent Interpretations of Thorstein Veblen's Theory of Institutional Change," in Thorstein Veblen: Critical Assessments II, John Cunningham Wood ed., (New York, 1993), pp. 455-56. I think that there is some truth in the idea that Veblen's theory had a "normative component" but Veblen never would have described his theory in this way. He constantly attacked the tendency of other economists to "normalize" their theories, and he would have been horrified by the idea that his own theory was "normladen." I also want to argue in the course of this essay that he did not see conventional neoclassical economists as "moral relativists" or "moral agnostics." What bothered Veblen about neoclassical economics were the pervasive moral assumptions that undermined its claims of objectivity.
3. See Joseph Dorfman in Thorstein Veblen and His America, (New York: 1934). Veblen considered "The Place of Science in Modern Civilization" his best essay. See Dorfman, p. 260. The essay became the title work of the most important collection of Veblen's essays. Dorfman also discussed how Veblen's emphasis on moral neutrality confused his classes as well as his readers: "Of Veblen's own opinions on prevailing questions no one was certain. ⋯ A student in the course in trusts would ask what could be done about the situation he described. Veblen's eyes would sparkle, the lines of his face would be drawn into a quizzical smile, and he would answer, in effect: "Mr. - is not satisfied with the philosopher's statement, 'I want to know.' Mr. - wants to do something about it.' The class would laugh and Veblen would say no more, but often he would tell his students: 'We are interested in what is, not what ought to be.'" pp. 246-247.
4. See Thorstein Veblen, "Mr. Cummings's Strictures on The Theory of the Leisure Class" in Essays in Our Changing Order, Leon Ardzrooni ed., (New York: 1934), pp. 16-31. Especially see pp. 18-19 where Veblen defended his definition of "waste."
5. On this confusion about Veblen's meaning, also see Tilman. In The Intellectual Legacy of Thorstein Veblen: Unresolved Issues, (Greenwood Press: Westport, Connecticut, 1996), Tilman notes that "there is no consensus among Veblen scholars left, right or center, be they social scientists, humanists or otherwise, regarding the central meaning of his work." p. Xi.
6. John Bates Clark, The Distribution of Wealth, (New York: 1899), p. v. Clark taught Veblen at Carleton College in Minnesota during the 1880s. Clark was a founding member of the American Economic Association. Today the most prestigious award that an American economist can win is the John Bates Clark Award.
7. In my dissertation, "Transcendental Economics: The Quest to Harmonize Economic and Moral Law in Nineteenth-Century American Thought," I study this tradition of American economic thought in detail by looking at the work of Henry C. Carey, Henry George, and John Bates Clark. I argue that Ralph Waldo Emerson, who was a friend of Carey's, helped to legitimize this way of thinking about the economy with his transcendental philosophy of mind. Emerson argued that the moral laws of the human mind were embedded in the scientific laws of nature. See, for example, Emerson's "Compensation," n which he says "Thus is the universe alive. All things are moral." The Selected Writings of Ralph Waldo Emerson, Brooks Atkinson ed., (New York: 1940), p. 175. Veblen's philosophy of nature was essentially the opposite of Emerson's. Veblen might say, "The universe is not alive. No thing is moral."
8. Notice the similarity between the categorical distinctions in Veblen's thought, and the epistemological categories of Immanuel Kant. According to Kant, the human mind, in the noumenal realm, was "spiritual," and "tdeological" whereas the phenomenal realm of natural science was materialistic and pre-determined. Veblen wrote his doctoral dissertation on Kant, and I think that Kant's philosophy continued to influence Veblen in more profound ways than most scholars have recognized. One could even argue that Veblen's attack against capitalism was based on his belief that it violated Kant's categorical imperative by treating human beings as means-or as phenomenological objects-rather than as ends. Although Veblen's dissertation has been lost, he published an interesting essay on "Kant's Critique of Judgment" in 1884. This can be found in Essays in Our Changing Order, 175-193.
9. Thorstein Veblen, "Why is Economics Not an Evolutionary Science," The Place of Science in Modern Civilization and Other Essays, (New York: 1919), pp. 59-60.
10. Thorstein Veblen, "The Evolution of the Scientific Point of View," The Place of Science in Modern Civilization and Other Essays, p. 41.
11. Thorstein Veblen, The Place of Science in Modern Civilization and other Essays Ibid., p. 41.
12. Thorstein Veblen, "Why is Economics Not an Evolutionary Science," The Place of Science in Modern Civilization and Other Essays, p. 63.
13. Thorstein Veblen, The Place of Science in Modern Civilization and other Essays Ibid., 61.
14. Thorstein Veblen, The Higher Learning in America, (New York: 1918), p. 9.
15. Thorstein Veblen, "The Economics of Karl Marx: II" in The Place of Science in Modern Civilization and Other Essays p. 436.
16. Thorstein Veblen, "Why is Economics Not an Evolutionary Science?" in The Place of Science in Modern Civilization, p. 65.
17. Thorstein Veblen, The Place of Science in Modern Civilization Ibid., p. 66.
18. It would take us away from the main argument of the essay to explore the interesting relationship between Marx and Veblen. Veblen considered Marx a Romantic, like the classical economists, because he believed that Marx assumed that some sort of non-human spiritual force was directing history to a specific human end, a socialist society. On a more subtle level, Veblen also believed that Marx's discussion of class interests was teleological. To talk about the interests-as opposed to the tendencies-of a class is to impute teleological consistency to it according to Veblen. Whereas Smith had seen a single spiritual agent governing the capitalist economy toward a harmonious end, Veblen thought that Marx saw two spiritual agents fighting out an inevitable battle. See Veblen's discussion of Marx in "The Socialist Economics of Karl Marx and His Followers," The Place of Science in Modern Civilization, pp. 409-456.
19. The Place of Science in Modern Civilization Ibid., p. 151.
20. For a discussion of the psychologists who may have influenced Veblen, see Tilman, "Veblen's Psychology and Its Doctrinal Roots," in The Intellectual Legacy of Thorstein Veblen, pp. 47-72.
21. Thorstein Veblen, The Theory of the Leisure Class, p 15. (my emphasis).
22. See Veblen's analysis of "The Limitations of Marginal Utility," in The Place of Science in Modern Civilization: "Both the classical school in general and its specialized variant, marginal-utility school, in particular, take as their common point of departure the traditional psychology of the early nineteenth-century hedonists, which is accepted as a matter of course or of common notoriety and is held quite uncritically." p. 234.
23. Thorstein Veblen, "Why is Economics Not an Evolutionary Science?" in The Place of Science in Modern Civilization, pp. 73-74.
24. Quoted by Joseph Dorfman in Thorstein Veblen and His America, (New York: 1934) p. 130-31.
25. Thorstein Veblen, "Why is Economics Not an Evolutionary Science?," The Place of Science in Modern Civilization, p. 74.
26. Thorstein Veblen, "The Limitations of Marginal Utility," The Place of Science in Modern Civilization, p. 249.
27. Thorstein Veblen, "The Preconceptions of Economic Science III," The Place of Science in Modern Civilization and Other Essays, p. 157.
28. Thorstein Veblen, The Theory of the Leisure Class, p. 219.
29. Thorstein Veblen, The Theory of the Leisure Class Ibid., p. 220.
30. Thorstein Veblen, The Instinct of Workmanship, (New York: 1914), p. 158.
31. Thorstein Veblen, The Theory of the Leisure Class, pp. 12-13.
32. Thorstein Veblen, The Theory of the Leisure Class Ibid., p. 17.
33. Thorstein Veblen, The Theory of the Leisure Class Ibid., p. 103.
34. Thorstein Veblen, "The Place of Science in Modern Civilization," The Place of Science in Modern Civilization, p. 12.
35. Thorstein Veblen, The Place of Science in Modern Civilization Ibid., p. 22.
36. Veblen studied with Sumner while he was at Yale and always claimed to admire him. According to Dorfman, "Sumner seems to have been the only man for whom (Veblen) expressed, in conversation, a deep and unqualified admiration." Thorstein Veblen and His America, p. 311.
37. Dorfman also notes that Veblen was a close student of Spencer. For a discussion of some of the ways that Spencer may have influenced Veblen, see E. Anton Eff, "History of Thought as Ceremonial Genealogy: The Neglected Influence of Herbert Spencer on Thorstein Veblen," in Thorstein Veblen: Critical Assessments 1, pp. 413-438. Especially interesting is Eff's comparison between Spencer's "Militant/Industrial Dichotomy" and Veblen's contrast between the predatory and industrial instincts on pp. 427-430.
38. Quoted by Dorfman, pp. 175-76.
39. Thorstein Veblen, "The Beginnings of Ownership," Essays in Our Changing Order, (New York: 1934), p. 42.
40. Thorstein Veblen, Essays in our Changing Order Ibid., p. 47.
41. Thorstein Veblen, Essays in our Changing Order Ibid., p. 47.
42. Thorstein Veblen, Essays in our Changing Order Ibid., p. 48.
43. Thorstein Veblen, Essays in our Changing Order Ibid., p. 48.
44. Thorstein Veblen, The Theory of the Leisure Class, pp. 31-32.
45. Thorstein Veblen, The Instinct of Workmanship, p. 210.
46. Thorstein Veblen, The Instinct of Workmanship Ibid, p. 204.
47. Thorstein Veblen, The Theory of Business Enterprise, (New York: 1904), p. 375.
48. Thorstein Veblen, Absentee Ownership, (New York: 1923), p. 48.
49. Thorstein Veblen, The Instinct of Workmanship.
50. Thorstein Veblen, The Instinct of Workmanship, p. 213.
51. Thorstein Veblen, "Mr. Cummings's Strictures on The Theory of the Leisure Class," in Essays in Our Changing Order, (New York: 1934), p. 28.
52. Thorstein Veblen, Absentee Ownership, p. 319.
53. Thorstein Veblen, Absentee Ownership Ibid., pp. 320-21.
54. Thorstein Veblen, The Theory of Business Enterprise, pp. 290-91.
55. Thorstein Veblen, The Theory of Business Enterprise, p. 310.
56. Thorstein Veblen, The Theory of Business Ibid., p. 16.
57. Thorstein Veblen, The Theory of Business Ibid., p. 266.
58. Thorstein Veblen, "Industrial and Pecuniary Employments, "The Place of Science in Modern Civilization, p. 311.
59. Thorstein Veblen, The Theory of Business Enterprise, p. 213.
60. Thorstein Veblen, The Theory of Business Enterprise Ibid., p. 237.
61. Thorstein Veblen, The Theory of Business Enterprise Ibid., p. 200.
62. Thorstein Veblen, The Theory of Business Enterprise Ibid., p. 201.
63. Thorstein Veblen, The Theory of Business Enterprise Ibid., pp. 232-233.
64. Thorstein Veblen, The Theory of Business Enterprise Ibid., p. 238.
65. Thorstein Veblen, The Theory of Business Enterprise Ibid., p. 232.
66. Thorstein Veblen, The Theory of Business Enterprise Ibid., p. 238.
67. Although this claim may surprise some readers today, it was a widely shared opinion amongst economists in Veblen's era. In some works of American history, the "Gilded Age," which preceded the reforms of the Progressive Era, has been described as an era of great prosperity for business. This was not how most of the businessmen who actually lived through the Gilded Age experienced it. Simply by noting the existence of a long depression, Veblen was not being iconoclastic. I discuss this issue in some detail in the fifth chapter of my dissertation, "The Crisis of Transcendental Economics." Also see, James Livingston, Origins of the Federal Reserves System: Money, Class, and Corporate Capitalism, 1890-1913, (Cornell: 1986).
68. The first chapter discusses this issue. The most influential contemporary account of the depression was David A. Wells, Recent Economic Changes, (New York: 1889).
69. Thorstein Veblen, The Theory of Business Enterprise, p. 234.
70. Thorstein Veblen, The Theory of Business Enterprise Ibid., p. 230.
71. Thorstein Veblen, "Dementia Praecox," in Essays in Our Changing Order, p. 430.
72. Thorstein Veblen, "Mr. Cummings Strictures on The Theory of the Leisure Class, " in Essays in Our Changing Order, pp. 18-19.