![]() ![]() ![]() This is also the path taken by many economic historians in recent years, both with its themes as well as its present and future challenges, and the views of the place of social sciences within the perspective of Western capitalist development (see, e.g., Mokyr, 2002 Clark, 2008 McCloskey, 2010 Piketty, 2014). Thus, this volume aims to approach these issues in an (inter) multidisciplinary way and bring together studies that create interdisciplinary pathways between economic history, sociology, and economics, following the theoretical ideas already set up by Weber and many other scholars since. Our approach is to embody the methodological and topical openness of social science history.ģIn this volume, we are trying to think about the interplay of the economy and the society as an organism with organizations and agents interacting in an evolving institutional framework over time (North, 2016 Greif and Mokyr, 2017). , 1999 Komlos and Baten, 2004 Inwood and Stewart, 2020). Many of the conferences linked to social science history have grown very large in the 2010s (Bearman et al. One broader area where economic, business, and social history have been able to interact with methodological freedom has been the so-called social science history, which has become a big theoretical and empirical arena for many. And certain topics, like the discussion of the impacts and origins of capitalism can get fairly heated, and the methodological boundaries can be hard to overcome (Galambos, 2014 Hilt, 2017 Olmstead and Rhode, 2018 Beckert and Desan, 2018). However, this type of broad debate is often limited to specific topics that transcend disciplinary boundaries, such as slavery, war, economic activity, and inequality (Szostak, 2006 Eloranta et al. In fact, we would argue that economic history, understood broadly, can serve as a conduit for interdisciplinary understanding of various topics, problems, and time periods, regardless of the methodology used. with a new design of economic frontiers, beginning with demographic growth and the recomposition and greater diversification of productive tissues” (Costa, Lains and Miranda, 2011: 14). Following this common thread, “… the definition of ‘economic action’ must be further manifested in such a way as to include the operation of a modern business enterprise run for profit”, and all economic processes and objects are characterized by the meaning they have for human action in playing such roles as ends, means, obstacles, and by-products (Weber, 1978 see also, Ringer, 2002).Ģ In this context, the basic concepts that economics and economic history use to analyze the society, such as the ideas pertaining to growth, prosperity, development and globalization, and/or expansion/interconnection are essentially modern, distinguished by the transformation from the 14 th to the 16 th centuries, but also and above all, as some scholars have indicated, “. This resource is, originally, driven and directed towards economic ends. ![]() ![]() 1 The economic orientation or the concept of “economic action” (Wirtschaften) introduced by Max Weber in his essays on the sociology of economics addresses the issue of satisfying desires for “utilities” (Nutzleistungen) as an exercise of an actor’s control over a certain resource. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |