Catálogo de publicaciones - libros

This essay introduces the reasons why Nietzsche is interesting for economics. It also attempts to set the background for economics-focused Nietzsche scholarship by detailing the pertinent research problems regarding this highly complex and often misunderstood philosopher.

This is a study of Nietzsche’s influence on the history of economic thought. It examines references to him in the histories of economic thought, the periodical literature and elsewhere, primarily in English, for any evidence of influence. Nietzsche did not influence the development of economics despite the fact that he did influence the development of several other social sciences. Any influence he had on the development of economic thought was very indirect. Reasons for this are discussed.

This paper is devoted to the economic problems dealt with in Nietzsche’s publications. First, it considers the references to the economists of his time. Then it examines the economic statements of Nietzsche. Some of them relate to Europe. They are the subject of a third part. In each part quotations from Nietzsche illustrate the contentions of the paper. A conclusion examines the significance of Nietzsche for economics.

This paper argues that the idea of ‘creative destruction’ enters the social sciences by way of Friedrich Nietzsche. The term itself is first used by German economist Werner Sombart, who openly acknowledges the influence of Nietzsche on his own economic theory. The roots of creative destruction are traced back to Indian philosophy, from where the idea entered the German literary and philosophical tradition. Understanding the origins and evolution of this key concept in evolutionary economics helps clarifying the contrasts between today’s standard mainstream economics and the Schumpeterian and evolutionary alternative.

In this short essay, Nietzsche’s basic thought on an economic order based on his anthropology — Nietzsche defines the human being as that animal which can give and keep promises — contains profound insights into the basic order of a market economy. The essay starts by quoting two essential sections from Nietzsche’s writings in his middle period and it connects this to a discussion of basic institutions of the market economy. It is hereby shown that Nietzsche, certainly not known as an economist, had profound insights into the basics of the workings of a market economy.

Although Friedrich Nietzsche seldom is considered for his economic thought, he in fact addressed many of the same problems as the German Historical School in the period, and at times discussed them explicitly. By studying Nietzsche’s political writings in the context of the ongoing debates about Marxism, , and the ‘Social Question’ in Germany and Italy, we hope to shed light on the broad spectrum of resistance against the extremes of communism and liberalism in late-19 century Europe.

Business ethics, a relatively new concept, is dominated by the theory of the categorical imperative (Kant) and by utilitarianism. This paper examines whether Nietzsche’s ideas would not be a better means of explaining the business world.

In looking towards the origins of uncertainty in economic theory, most economists point to the groundbreaking work of Frank Knight in America or J.M. Keynes in England. However, it can be argued that developments in philosophy contributed, at least in some way, to the proposition of uncertainty in economics, particularly in the case of Knight. In tracing the nature and scope of these contributions, as they relate to Knightian uncertainty, this paper generally looks beyond the more immediate Pragmatic influence on Knight, towards a work by an author who anticipates some of what both Knight and the Pragmatists were to emphasise; the . In describing this possible anticipation by Nietzsche, it will be necessary to present the discussion into three parts. First, since the understanding of Nietzsche is premised on an understanding of the philosophical context that confronted Nietzsche, a brief outline of this context will be provided. Second, a more detailed examination of Nietzsche’s anticipation of Knightian uncertainty is then provided. Third, a comparison of Knightian uncertainty, the principles of Pragmatic philosophy, and Nietzsche’s is used to provide a more detailed articulation of possible anticipations of Nietzsche.

The history of the Friedrich-Nietzsche-reception in the GDR developed controversially and comprises various phases. At the beginning, a verdict on Nietzsche was imposed, since he was considered as an intellectual forerunner of fascism. This verdict was followed by a critical discussion of his work in the 60s and 70s. Finally in the 80s, Nietzsche’s integration into the national German cultural heritage began. To comment correctly on this contradictory process of the history of reception the view from “outside”, which oriented itself by official announcements is not sufficient. On the contrary, it is necessary to complement this view — against the background of the development of domestic and foreign policy of the GDR — by a precise review of the internal philosophic and cultural-scientific discussion in the GDR.

The paper analyzes the reception of Friedrich Nietzsche in the work of Wolfgang Harich who was one of the most famous philosophers and political thinkers of the GDR. It is discussed the approaches of Harich to the philosopher from Röcken and argued that Harich’s main approach to Nietzsche was characterized by an ideological concept of an enemy. Its hard core was to present Friedrich Nietzsche as the most eminent creator of the Nazi ideology. The paper shows that Wolfgang Harich’s treatment of Nietzsche was very strongly influenced by the Hungarian Marxist philosopher Georg Lukacs and his concept of the late bourgeois philosophy.