IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/eujhet/v16y2009i4p575-597.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The history of economics as economics?

Author

Listed:
  • Yuichi Shionoya

Abstract

This paper critically evaluates the current decline of the relationship between economics and the history of economics, and proposes a framework called the panorama-cum-scenario model for the practice of the history of economics. Starting with the Hegelian thesis that the history of economics is economics itself, the paper argues that such a relationship is necessary but not sufficient because the history of economics is a metatheory addressed to economic theory. The history of economics needs a panoramic view of the subject and a scenario for the construction, interpretation, and evaluation of the system of economics. The panorama-cum-scenario model enables us to work on the history of economics not only by historical and rational reconstruction but also by global reconstruction. Nietzsche's anti-Hegelian viewpoint and Heidegger's hermeneutical standpoint are useful for identifying the role of historical research in developing economic knowledge based on the panorama-cum-scenario model. Several approaches to the history of economics are examined in light of the panorama-cum-scenario model. Schumpeter's history of economics is interpreted as an example of the panorama-cum-scenario model.

Suggested Citation

  • Yuichi Shionoya, 2009. "The history of economics as economics?," The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(4), pages 575-597.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:eujhet:v:16:y:2009:i:4:p:575-597
    DOI: 10.1080/09672560903201243
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09672560903201243
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. André Lapidus, 2016. "Pourquoi l'histoire de la pensée économique est-elle différente des autres histoires ?
      [Почему История Экономической Мысли Отличается От Других Историй?]
      ," Post-Print hal-01619020, HAL.
    2. Lucarelli, Stefano & Baron, Hervé, 2014. "On Schumpeter’s 'The Past and Future of Social Sciences'. A Schumpeterian Theory of Scientific Development?," MPRA Paper 60391, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:eujhet:v:16:y:2009:i:4:p:575-597. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Chris Longhurst). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/REJH20 .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.