Artigos de revistas sobre o tema "Capitalism – philosophy"
Siga este link para ver outros tipos de publicações sobre o tema: Capitalism – philosophy.
Crie uma referência precisa em APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, e outros estilos
Veja os 50 melhores artigos de revistas para estudos sobre o assunto "Capitalism – philosophy".
Ao lado de cada fonte na lista de referências, há um botão "Adicionar à bibliografia". Clique e geraremos automaticamente a citação bibliográfica do trabalho escolhido no estilo de citação de que você precisa: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.
Você também pode baixar o texto completo da publicação científica em formato .pdf e ler o resumo do trabalho online se estiver presente nos metadados.
Veja os artigos de revistas das mais diversas áreas científicas e compile uma bibliografia correta.
1
Kernohan, Andrew. "Capitalism and Self-Ownership". Social Philosophy and Policy 6, n.º 1 (1988): 60–76. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0265052500002685.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
From the standpoint of libertarian ideology, capitalism is a form of liberation. In contrast to the slave, whose productive powers are wholly owned by his master, and the serf, whose productive powers are partially owned by his lord, the worker under capitalism is presented as possessing the fullest possible self-ownership. That capitalism fosters self-ownership is a false and stultifying myth. Exposing its errors from within capitalism's own conceptual framework requires a careful analysis of the concept of a person's “ownership” bodh of his or her productive powers and of the means of exercising these productive powers. This analysis will show that, in certain plausible circumstances, the capitalist economic system can make full self-ownership impossible. Since capitalism's supposed nurturing of self-ownership provides one of the major justifications for its moral legitimacy, capitalist ideology has a serious internal inconsistency.
2
Sperber, Nathan. "The many lives of state capitalism: From classical Marxism to free-market advocacy". History of the Human Sciences 32, n.º 3 (julho de 2019): 100–124. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0952695118815553.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
State capitalism has recently come to the fore as a transversal research object in the social sciences. Renewed interest in the notion is evident across several disciplines, in scholarship addressing government interventionism in economic life in major developing countries. This emergent field of study on state capitalism, however, consistently bypasses the remarkable conceptual trajectory of the notion from the end of the 19th century to the present. This article proposes an intellectual-historical survey of state capitalism’s many lives across different ensembles of writing: early Marxist pronouncements on state capitalism at the time of the Second International; theories of state capitalism evolved in the first half of the 20th century in response to the European experience of war and fascism; dissident portrayals of the Soviet Union as state-capitalist; post-Second World War theories of state-monopoly capitalism in the Western Bloc; examinations of state capitalism as a development strategy in ‘Third World’ nations in the 1970s and 1980s; and finally, today’s scholarship on new patterns of state capitalism in emerging economies. Having contextualized each of these strands of writing, the article goes on to interrogate definitional and conceptual boundaries of state capitalism. It then maps out essential institutional features of state-capitalist configurations as construed in the literature. In sharp contrast to 20th-century theories of state capitalism, present-day scholarship on the topic tends to retreat from the integrated critique of political economy, shifting its problematics of state-market relations to meso- and micro-levels of analysis.
3
Venkatesh, Nikhil. "Surveillance Capitalism: a Marx-inspired account". Philosophy 96, n.º 3 (14 de maio de 2021): 359–85. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0031819121000164.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
AbstractSome of the world's most powerful corporations practise what Shoshana Zuboff (2015; 2019) calls ‘surveillance capitalism’. The core of their business is harvesting, analysing and selling data about the people who use their products. In Zuboff's view, the first corporation to engage in surveillance capitalism was Google, followed by Facebook; recently, firms such as Microsoft and Amazon have pivoted towards such a model. In this paper, I suggest that Karl Marx's analysis of the relations between industrial capitalists and workers is closely analogous to the relations between surveillance capitalists and users. Furthermore, three problematic aspects of industrial capitalism that Marx describes – alienation, exploitation and accumulation – are also aspects, in new forms, of surveillance capitalism. I draw heavily on Zuboff's work to make these parallels. However, my Marx-inspired account of surveillance capitalism differs from hers over the nature of the exchange between users and surveillance capitalists. For Zuboff, this is akin either to robbery or the gathering of raw materials; on the Marx-inspired account it is a voluntary sale. This difference has important implications for the question of how to resist surveillance capitalism.
4
Fernández, Víctor Ramiro, Matthias Ebenau e Alcides Bazza. "Rethinking Varieties of Capitalism from the Latin American Periphery". Review of Radical Political Economics 50, n.º 2 (9 de novembro de 2017): 392–408. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0486613417690139.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
The article reconsiders how capitalist diversity is conceived of in the mainstream institutionalist “comparative capitalisms” literature. It highlights the division between centers and peripheries as a differentiation prior to national varieties, subsequently introducing the concepts of “nuclei of accumulation” and “nuclei of state implication.” It proposes to analyze (peripheral) varieties of capitalism as results of the conformation and change of these nuclei, their interrelations, and their insertion into global economic and political networks.
5
Arnold, N. Scott. "Capitalists and the Ethics of Contribution". Canadian Journal of Philosophy 15, n.º 1 (março de 1985): 87–102. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00455091.1985.10716411.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
To paraphrase Freud, what do socialists really want? It is undoubtedly difficult to give a complete answer to this question that all socialists would be satisfied with, but there are some common elements that can hardly be denied. First and foremost among these is the elimination of capitalism; the elimination of capitalism would seem to require the elimination of capitalists (qua capitalists). Why might that be desirable? Well, many reasons might be offered, but one is suggested by the very nature of capitalism.
6
Thakur, Manindra Nath. "Is Capitalism Facing a Philosophical Crisis?" Social Change 50, n.º 2 (junho de 2020): 215–35. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0049085720923865.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
The contemporary crisis of capitalism is more fundamental in the sense that it is indicating an ontic mutation of the system. The resolution of the earlier crisis of capitalism gradually deviated it from the philosophy of its founding fathers. The primary justification of capitalism was its commitment to the ‘common good’, which was replaced by the ‘idea of freedom’ during the resolution of the crisis in the 1970s. The present crisis of capitalism, which started in 2008, is deeper and does not have either the idea of ‘common good’ or the ‘idea of freedom’ as a legitimising philosophy. The resolution of the current crisis is not dependent on human labour as it can be replaced by technology based on Artificial Intelligence and Robotics. There is no sign of developing any new philosophical justification for the newly emerging form of capitalism. The article argues that if this does not happen, then the capitalist state in the future will be more exploitative and oppressive.
7
CAO, Longhu. "The Discussion of Ziben zhuyi (capitalism) in China’s Debate on Socialism (1920-1921)". Cultura 17, n.º 2 (1 de janeiro de 2020): 75–86. http://dx.doi.org/10.3726/cul022020.0006.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
Abstract: The spread of “capitalism” from West to East not only brought knowledge of an economic model but also offered nations a new path for development. This expansion was met by the rise of the socialist revolutionary movement, which aimed to overthrow the capitalist political and economic system. This article examines the concept of “capitalism” in the context of the debate on socialism. By studying the elaborations of Ziben zhuyi (capitalism) by its proponents and opponents, as well as the debate-related expressions proposed by later scholars in different contexts, this study reflects on the politicization of “capitalism”, the complexity of its meaning, and the degree of political ideology in its implementation. Based on the analysis of relevant papers on the debate, it concludes that (1) as a highly politicized concept, “capitalism” reflects intellectuals’ assumptions regarding China’s future and the evolution of its political ideologies; (2) “capitalism” has a complicated conceptual connotation, and it is necessary to consider its many aspects to present the full picture of what people think about it; and (3) the degree of capitalist ideology varies in different periods and contexts.
8
CAO, Longhu. "The Discussion of Ziben zhuyi (capitalism) in China’s Debate on Socialism (1920-1921)". Cultura 19, n.º 1 (1 de janeiro de 2022): 75–86. http://dx.doi.org/10.3726/cul012022.0006.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
Abstract: The spread of “capitalism” from West to East not only brought knowledge of an economic model but also offered nations a new path for development. This expansion was met by the rise of the socialist revolutionary movement, which aimed to overthrow the capitalist political and economic system. This article examines the concept of “capitalism” in the context of the debate on socialism. By studying the elaborations of Ziben zhuyi (capitalism) by its proponents and opponents, as well as the debate-related expressions proposed by later scholars in different contexts, this study reflects on the politicization of “capitalism”, the complexity of its meaning, and the degree of political ideology in its implementation. Based on the analysis of relevant papers on the debate, it concludes that (1) as a highly politicized concept, “capitalism” reflects intellectuals’ assumptions regarding China’s future and the evolution of its political ideologies; (2) “capitalism” has a complicated conceptual connotation, and it is necessary to consider its many aspects to present the full picture of what people think about it; and (3) the degree of capitalist ideology varies in different periods and contexts.
9
Dymski, Gary A., e John E. Elliott. "Capitalism and the Democratic Economy". Social Philosophy and Policy 6, n.º 1 (1988): 140–64. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0265052500002715.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
Mainstream economics evaluates capitalism primarily from the perspective of efficiency. Social philosophy typically applies other or additional normative criteria, such as equality, democracy, and community. This essay examines the implications of these contrasting sets of criteria in the evaluation of capitalism. Its first two sections consider the criteria themselves, assuming that a trade-off exists between them. The last three sections question whether such a trade-off necessarily occurs, and explore the claim that improvements in nonefficiency dimensions of capitalist society may enhance, rather than conflict with, efficiency.
10
N.G, Obah-Akpowoghaha, B. T. Badejo e Ogunmilade A. "NEW-TECHNOLOGIES AS A RECIPE FOR MITIGATING THE ILLS OF CAPITALISM AND UNDERDEVELOPMENT IN AFRICA". Australian Journal of Business and Management Research 04, n.º 01 (17 de janeiro de 2014): 01–07. http://dx.doi.org/10.52283/nswrca.ajbmr.20140401a01.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
Capitalism as a concept that is alien to Africa traditions have been regarded as a philosophy that engendered inequality and conflict between and among Africans. Scholars like Karl Marx, Kwame Nkrumah, Walter Rodney, Jomo Kenyatta and other Marxism’s subscribers have always stressed the ills and the contradictions that are inherent in the capitalist system and attributing underdevelopment as a by-product of a capitalist system. However, the unprecedented nature of Information Technology (IT) in this 21st century has reformed and cause a paradigm shift in the practices and the interaction of political economy of emerging economy especially the operations of capitalism. While thousands of literature have laid emphasized on Adam Smith’s concepts of the market system and paying little attention to the dynamics of New Technology in the global system vis-à-vis capitalism. Hence, the paper examines new technologies as a means of mitigating underdevelopment and ills of capitalism in Africa and further made salient suggestions how New Technologies can be use to mitigate the ills of capitalist system in emergent economy in Africa. Consequently, in achieving this objective, the paper relies on secondary data such as textbooks, internet materials, etc.
11
Klikauer, Thomas. "Philosophy, Capitalism, Individualism, and History". Radical Philosophy Review 21, n.º 1 (2018): 215–17. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/radphilrev201821183.
Texto completo da fonte
12
Nuyen, A. T. "Chinese philosophy and western capitalism". Asian Philosophy 9, n.º 1 (março de 1999): 71–79. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09552369908575490.
Texto completo da fonte
13
Gray, John. "Against Cohen On Proletarian Unfreedom". Social Philosophy and Policy 6, n.º 1 (1988): 77–112. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0265052500002697.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
In a series of important papers, G.A. Cohen has developed a forceful argument for the claim that workers are rendered unfree by capitalist institutions. His argument poses a powerful challenge to those (such as myself) who think that capitalist institutions best promote freedom. Yet, formidable as it is, Cohen's argument can be shown to be flawed at several crucial points. It is not one argument, but three at least, and one of the goals of my criticism of Cohen on this question is to distinguish and assess the various separate lines of reasoning that together make up his case for the unfreedom under capitalism of workers as a class. Cohen argues of workers that they are rendered unfree by the institution of private property on which the capitalist system depends, that they suffer a form of collective unfreedom under capitalism, and that they are forced to sell their labor power under capitalism.
14
Zhang, Fengrong, e Qianwen Xiao. "Marxist view on global political economy and new market trends". Trans/Form/Ação 46, spe (2023): 79–106. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/0101-3173.2023.v46esp.p79.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
Abstract: Capitalism was always dishonest. However, capitalism has generated massive wealth. Capitalism has been linked to exploitation, wealth inequality, economic collapse, and world strife. Political economy has studied capitalism’s multiple faces. Can capitalism’s problems be eliminated while retaining its benefits, as proponents claim? Capitalism can only be eliminated by limiting or abolishing it, say some critics. This issue’s outcome is largely influenced by theory. Economists believe markets are fair for assessing and rewarding economic contributions to society. Individual inadequacy, not market dominance, causes social and individual problems. The Marxian notion that production relations underpin every society is the key to understanding the contemporary breakdown of order. Class structures sustain political, cultural, and ideological institutions. New production relations, or “no class” interactions, are needed to create a postcapitalist society. Just as new economic relationships arose over the centuries during Europe’s transition from feudalism to industrial capitalism, and a new society developed on the foundation of these systems, so new manifestations of monumental growth in production will evolve in the coming generations to reduce crisis-stricken times. Banks needed a rescue after the global economy collapsed in late 2007. Market economies are not self-regulating. Since it upended traditional patterns of thinking, the disaster allowed people to reconsider long-standing issues that had never been resolved. After the crisis, Marx’s “Capital” sold well worldwide, according to booksellers. Marxism is making a return. Due to its critical legacy in the humanities and social sciences, Marxism cannot be confined in a 19th-century framework. Marx permeated our water and air even while he was rejected. Marxism is everywhere in the 21st century. Modern Marxism supports entrepreneurship and free enterprise if they improve society.
15
Cheng, Sam-Kee. "Primitive Socialist Accumulation in China: An Alternative View on the Anomalies of Chinese “Capitalism”". Review of Radical Political Economics 52, n.º 4 (23 de maio de 2020): 693–715. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0486613419888298.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
China’s economic system has yet to be adequately explained by any models. China’s export-led industries were initially viewed as a source of cheap labor but its economy has now emerged as a serious competitor to advanced capitalism. However, after decades of market reform, China’s state sector, rather than disappearing or being marginalized, has become a leader in strategic sectors and the driver of its investment-led growth. Heterodox political scientists and economists have long argued that China is at best a variant within global capitalism. This paper discusses heterodox theories that position China as part of global capitalism or regard it as a variety of capitalism. It then examines the anomalies of Chinese “capitalism” and suggests that primitive socialist accumulation—operating in conflict with capitalist accumulation—offers a more appropriate theoretical framework for studying China’s development.
16
Chistyakov, Denis I. "Philosophy of Accelerationism: A New Way of Comprehending the Present Social Reality (in Nick Land’s Context)". RUDN Journal of Philosophy 26, n.º 3 (30 de setembro de 2022): 687–96. http://dx.doi.org/10.22363/2313-2302-2022-26-3-687-696.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
Modern types of social reality require updated ways of comprehending them. The research is devoted to a new analytical form of understanding modernity that has recently emerged - accelerationism, still rarely discussed in Russian philosophy. The representatives of accelerationism call for a radical and rapid acceleration of socio-economic and technological processes in capitalist societies. The article reflects some ideas of the Manifesto for an Accelerationist Politics by Alex Williams and Nick Srnicek, after which the accelerationist trend in philosophy and social sciences intensified and gained clear theoretical guidelines. The Manifesto’s ideas about accelerating technological evolution as a means of resolving social conflicts, about unleashing all the latent forces of capitalist production to achieve a state of post-capitalism, denying a return to the Fordist type of production and calling for the restoration of the future as such, are highlighted. The Manifesto and the works of Nick Land, the founder and the most prominent representative of accelerationism, present the position of creating a new program and the very style of thinking with regard to changing the capitalist system along the vector of acceleration. The article pays attention to the interpretation of Gilles Deleuze’s and Félix Guattari’s concept of “deterritorialization” in Land’s works. It emphasizes the focus of accelerationism on the future as a kind of realization of the paradoxical thesis of “looking back from the future.” The content of Land’s accelerationist theory shows the fundamental concepts of K-space (cyberspace), K-war (cyberwar), time and reality, technocratic future of society as Techno-Capital Singularity, expansion of capital as opposed to its reterritorialization. The meaning of Land’s idea of an acceleration of capitalism and the transition to a more progressive future through the collapse of outmoded structures and phenomena of the existing system of capitalism and its technological basis is deduced.
17
Levine, Andrew. "Capitalist Persons". Social Philosophy and Policy 6, n.º 1 (1988): 39–59. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0265052500002673.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
In what follows, “persons” are ideal-typical concepts of human beings, deployed expressly or supposed implicitly in particular theoretical contexts. Thus, the person of Kantian moral philosophy is a pure bearer of moral predicates, bereft of all properties that empirically distinguish human beings from one another: properties that, in Kant's view, are irrelevant to moral deliberation. No man or woman, actual or possible, could be so starkly featureless. But Kant's aim was not to describe human beings in actual or possible deliberations, but moral agency as such. Similarly, homo oeconomicus, economic man, is not a composite man or woman, but also a person, a theoretical construct introduced for explanatory purposes in models of economic behavior. My aim is to investigate capitalist persons: ideal-typical concepts of human beings deployed in justifying theories of capitalist property relations.I shall identify two capitalist persons, and impugn one of them. To situate my position historically, I call the impugned person Lockean, and the other Kantian. It is tempting to designate the Lockean person “the capitalist person.” However, this characterization would be misleading. Justifying theories of capitalism can employ either concept, and both can serve in accounts of socialist economies. Nevertheless, the Lockean person is tendentially procapitalist while the Kantian person is not.What follows is therefore relevant to the broader capitalism/socialism debate. To fault the Lockean person is not quite to fault capitalism itself. But a case against the Lockean person, if successful, would undermine an important strain of procapitalist argument. More importantly, the considerations I will adduce suggest a way of thinking about distributive justice and, ultimately, an ideal of equality that socialism, but not capitalism, can in principle accommodate.
18
Fuchs, Christian. "Günther Anders’ Undiscovered Critical Theory of Technology in the Age of Big Data Capitalism". tripleC: Communication, Capitalism & Critique. Open Access Journal for a Global Sustainable Information Society 15, n.º 2 (12 de junho de 2017): 582–611. http://dx.doi.org/10.31269/triplec.v15i2.898.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
Günther Anders (1902-1992) was an Austrian philosopher, critical theorist, political activist, and a writer of poems, short stories and novels. His works on the critical theory of technology have remained rather undiscovered. His main work Die Antiquiertheit des Menschen (The Antiquatedness of the Human Being) appeared in two volumes and has thus far not been published in English. This essay reviews key aspects of Anders’ works and uses them to critically assess big data capitalism. It first discusses Anders’ concept of the Promethean gap; the gap between what humans can produce with the help of technologies and the capacity of imagining the negative effects these technologies can have. The essay also engages with Anders’ analysis of commercial television and radio. Anders sees capitalism as having catastrophic potentials. He argues that Auschwitz and Hiroshima are two symbols of 20th-century catastrophism. The article discusses Anders’ letter to Klaus Eichmann, the son of Adolf Eichmann, who was in charge of the organisation of the displacement and deportation of Jews in the Third Reich. It furthermore analyses the exchange of letters between Anders and Claude Eatherly, the pilot of an aircraft that supported dropping the nuclear bomb “Little Boy” on Hiroshima. Finally, the paper engages with Anders’ critique of Martin Heidegger’s philosophy. In the age of the Internet and big data capitalism, Anders’ warnings about the potential negative effects of capitalist technologies and capitalism remain of crucial relevance and have taken on new qualities. Anders’ philosophy is an undiscovered critical theory of technology that allows us to critically understand power structures in the age of big data and social media.Günther Anders and Hannah Arendt. Source: posted on Flickr as CC by acido nucleio, https://www.flickr.com/photos/guntheranders/4248063814
19
Cook, Deborah. "The Impact of Christianity on Capitalism". Philosophy Today 64, n.º 3 (2020): 691–707. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/philtoday2020108354.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
This paper represents a preliminary attempt to explore Max Weber’s and Michel Foucault’s distinct accounts of how Christianity facilitated the development of capitalism in the West. Very generally, Weber and Foucault agree that it was the conducts that Christianity inculcated in individuals that aided capitalism’s development. Yet this paper shows that they disagree about what these conducts were, how they were inculcated, and in whom.
20
Vitale, Sarah E. "Post-Marxist Political Ontology and the Foreclosure of Radical Newness". Philosophy Today 64, n.º 3 (2020): 651–69. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/philtoday2020107352.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
Much of leftist political philosophy has uncritically accepted the logic of capitalism, which is a logic of conservation that presents itself as a logic of “production.” Many leftist political philosophers subscribe to capitalism’s fundamental myth—that capitalism produces the new. This appearance of proliferation, however, masks an underlying stasis. This article interrogates this trend in the apparently disparate projects of contemporary accelerationism and Jacques Rancière. The accelerationist project of immanence allows for newness only in quantity and not in quality, while Rancière, coming closer to thinking radical newness in his account of politics, forecloses the possibility of a radically emancipatory society. I suggest an open ontology, which Marx offers, provides a better framework for thinking revolutionary newness.
21
Budolfson, Mark. "Arguments for Well-Regulated Capitalism, and Implications for Global Ethics, Food, Environment, Climate Change, and Beyond". Ethics & International Affairs 35, n.º 1 (2021): 83–98. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0892679421000083.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
AbstractDiscourse on food ethics often advocates the anti-capitalist idea that we need less capitalism, less growth, and less globalization if we want to make the world a better and more equitable place. This idea is also familiar from much discourse in global ethics, environment, and political theory, more generally. However, many experts argue that this anti-capitalist idea is not supported by reason and argument, and is actually wrong. As part of the roundtable, “Ethics and the Future of the Global Food System,” the main contribution of this essay is to explain the structure of the leading arguments against this anti-capitalist idea, and in favor of well-regulated capitalism. I initially focus on general arguments for and against globalized capitalism. I then turn to implications for the food, environment, climate change, and beyond. Finally, I clarify the important kernel of truth in the critique of neoliberalism familiar from food ethics, political theory, and beyond—as well as the limitations of that critique.
22
Essien, Essien Oku. "The Intersection in Marxist New International Politics and Derrida’s Philosophy: A Meta-Analytics Inquiry of Its Impacts on Western Macro-Economy". American Journal of Economics and Business Innovation 3, n.º 1 (7 de fevereiro de 2024): 56–65. http://dx.doi.org/10.54536/ajebi.v3i1.2366.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
The current economic structure in the West is presented in this study as the product of a meeting of Marxist and Derridean ideas. In the light of this intersection and their variance, this study aims to contrast the economic views of Marx and Derrida with those of mainstream capitalism, to assess Derrida’s philosophical grounds for doubting the stability of Western economic structures, to understand the implications of adopting the Marxist perspective in the Western economic system, to examine how Marxist New International Politics and Derrida’s philosophy intersect, and what it means for international trade relations and global economic control. The study’s discourse was informed by the principles of Neoclassical economics to accomplish these objectives. The research used a systematic review process, with the PRISMA criteria utilized to guide the selection and screening of articles, hence, N = 482, n = 32. While 34% of the screened publications were found in Google Scholar (GS), the years 2015, 2019, and 2022 accounted for 57% of the cited papers. The research also used thematic analysis, delving deeply into four themes: Marx’s criticism of capitalism, Derrida’s deconstruction of capitalism, power and hegemonic dynamics, globalization and neoliberalism. The study findings show that Marx’s ideal economic system is one in which production choices are made by centralized authorities rather than the exploitative capitalist market. While Derrida agrees with the Marxist negative perspectives of capitalism, thus establishing an intersection, he argues that the transition from a capitalist system to an alternative society may cause considerable economic problems, thus advocating for improvements and not a switch. The study contends that the synthesis of the capitalist system’s positive and negative qualities has had a significant impact on the argument between Marxist and Derridean scholars and this link has established a framework for more research in economics.
23
Hoevel, Carlos. "Between Novak and Maritain: The discussion on the capitalist economy in Catholic thought". Ethics & Bioethics 13, n.º 3-4 (1 de dezembro de 2023): 138–48. http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/ebce-2023-0018.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
Abstract Although Novak recognizes himself as a disciple of Maritain, especially in his thesis on the Christian origins of democracy, the differences between the two in their views on the capitalist economy are evident. However, in his famous book, The Spirit of Democratic Capitalism, and in other previous works, Novak tries to show some possible bridges between Maritain’s thought and the virtues of American capitalism. This attempt is actually part of a larger project by Novak: that of showing the essential compatibility of Catholicism with capitalism. The purpose of this article is to show, based on Novak’s thought in relation to Maritain, the possibilities and difficulties of this attempt.
24
Skouras, George. "Modernity, the Commons and Capitalism". British Journal of American Legal Studies 9, n.º 2 (4 de agosto de 2020): 367–86. http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/bjals-2020-0012.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
AbstractThe modern way of life and reflected in modern political philosophy is directed by capitalist activity of both commodities and persons. Entities that do not have commodity value are worthless to the capitalist enterprise, regardless of any intrinsic value in themselves. Modernity is capitalist modernity. Modernity has given preference for objects/commodities over persons. This paper will argue for opening-up the landscape for alternative experiences to capitalism, as an attempt to move away from the capitalist enterprise. That is, be able to provide open space for people to use other than the buying and selling of commodities---where the commodification process breaks down and opens-up spaces for alternative experiences besides the capitalist experience. In other words, this work will attempt to serve as critique of Enlightenment philosophical discourse---that is, serve as a critique of the Age of Enlightenment serving as the foundational head of modernism---a plea for the rebellion against the quantification and mathematization of reality under modernist and industrial societies. It will use the modern landscape as the first effort to break free from the capitalist enterprise.
25
Arnold, N. Scott. "Equality and Exploitation in the Market Socialist Community". Social Philosophy and Policy 9, n.º 1 (janeiro de 1992): 1–28. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0265052500003587.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
Historically, critics of capitalism have had a great deal to say about the defects and social ills that afflict capitalist society and correspondingly little to say about how alternative institutional arrangements might solve these problems. One can only speculate about why this has been so. One reason might be a simple matter of priorities. Bertolt Brecht once said that when a man's house is on fire, one does not inquire too closely into alternative arrangements for shelter. The analogy between capitalism and a burning house may seem overwrought today, but in the dark days of the Depression of the 1930s it probably seemed more apt. Another explanation for the scant attention paid to alternatives to capitalism has to do with both the factual and ideological beliefs of capitalism's critics. If one believes (as, for example, Marx and Engels did) that the existing order would be destroyed by a mass movement, that new institutions would be constructed by the people in a democratic spirit, and that furthermore all of this would be a good thing, it would be unwise and counterproductive to try to spell out exactly where history is headed. After all, a genuine mass movement has little use for self-proclaimed prophets of history. Finally, men and women of modest intellectual pretensions might be humbled by the prospects of trying to spell out in any detail social institutions that should exist or might exist but are not as yet found anywhere in the world.
26
Smith, Tony. "Against Capitalism". International Studies in Philosophy 29, n.º 1 (1997): 147–48. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/intstudphil199729126.
Texto completo da fonte
27
Onuoha, Gerald Kelvin, e Ishmael U. Gwunireama. "Capitalist Critique of Karl Marx on Surplus Value". International Journal of Humanities and Innovation (IJHI) 5, n.º 1 (28 de março de 2022): 27–33. http://dx.doi.org/10.33750/ijhi.v5i1.143.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
Karl Marx (1818–1883) was an outstanding German philosopher of political economy. His disdain and displeasure for capitalism as an economic and political system logically stems from his claim that it is unjustifiably exploitative, dehumanizing, and alienating. He conceives of it as being characterised by wage labor, and this leads to industrial disharmony between the capitalists and the laborers. This paper examines Marx’s conception of surplus value, the nature and character of labour theory of value, and alienation, which are key issues in Marxist-Leninist political philosophy. It is, particularly, a reaction to the Marxian claim that surplus value is created in the course of production. It argues that profit and extra capital are the basis for the survival of many businesses. Therefore, it concludes that what Marx refers to as surplus value actually is a return on investment that the capitalist further puts back into the business to enable the equipment, payment of wages, salaries, and delivery of welfare packages/incentives to workers in order to make a business a going concern. As a result, there is no surplus value, and it is not a valid basis for industrial disharmony between capitalists and laborers as long as the parties are bound by the employment contract negotiated in accordance with the legal regime.
28
Lind, Andreas. "Radical Capitalism as a Coherentist Philosophy". Athens Journal of Humanities and Arts 4, n.º 3 (30 de junho de 2017): 183–98. http://dx.doi.org/10.30958/ajha.4.3.2.
Texto completo da fonte
29
Rodriguez, Jason. "The US Minimalist Movement: Radical Political Practice?" Review of Radical Political Economics 50, n.º 2 (20 de janeiro de 2017): 286–96. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0486613416665832.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
The US minimalist movement represents an increasingly popular critical reflection on the ills of consumerism and an effort to forge new ways of living amidst consumer capitalism. In the face of escalating consumption, debt, and environmental degradation, minimalists’ calls for rethinking “needs” is timely and highlights important problems that typify US capitalism. This article explores minimalists’ social-theoretical insights and resistance to consumerism considering whether, and to what extent, minimalism represents a radical, anti-capitalist movement.
30
Tratnik, Polona. "Art Addressing Consumerism in the Age of Late Capitalism". Croatian journal of philosophy 21, n.º 61 (21 de maio de 2021): 39–51. http://dx.doi.org/10.52685/cjp.21.1.3.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
The globalized world is still in the phase of late capitalism, signified by the establishment of multinational corporations, globalized markets and work, mass consumerism, and the fluid flow of capital. The question of the criticism of art towards the capitalist system, its ideology and consumerism is therefore still current and is readdressed in this contribution. Considering this issue, the recurrent theoretical reference is American materialist aesthetician Fredric Jameson, who was among the first to define culture and art in the context of late capitalism. In the article the author revises Jameson’s critique of art addressing consumerism and demonstrates that he did not consider the relevance of the means of consumption as regards the cultural logic of late capitalism. She claims that in order to open space to examine contemporary art as being critical towards consumerism, one also needs to consider the ontological changes that have occurred to art and pay attention to performative art, while Jameson was still focused on a representational mode of art. By being performative and also setting out actions outside of spaces that were traditionally designed for art, in the space meant for consumption, art has much a better chance to act politically, which Jameson wished to see from art which addresses consumerism but did not. The author argues that if one is to seek critical or political art in late capitalism, those would be the cases of artistic interventions into the means of consumption.
31
Naumova, E. I., e A. V. Makarin. "Д. ЛУКАЧ: ТОЧКА ЗРЕНИЯ ТОТАЛЬНОСТИ КАК ДЕКОНСТРУКЦИЯ КАПИТАЛИЗМА". Konfliktologia 14, n.º 4 (6 de fevereiro de 2020): 56. http://dx.doi.org/10.31312/2310-6085-2019-14-4-56-65.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
it is represented the Lukacs’ conception of revolution totality as deconstruction of capitalism. Lukacs shows, based on the Marx conception of surplus value, that the calculation of the social required working time as a standard for evaluation of labour on production is the basis of rational calculation and the result is the reduction of the time category to the space category. It means that the amount of working time becomes equivalent to the amount of goods produced, that is the source of the odjectification of human consciousness and social relations as a whole. Thus, the laws of production become objective, “natural” character, extending to all spheres of society, while hiding the truth that the capitalist system based on the violence. Irrationality is an integral part of the development of capitalism, and it exists as “displaced”, whereas rationality as an ideological form of capitalism demonstrated and rooted in the culture and life of society. Capitalist irrationality is that man is unable to see the totality of capitalism and the artificial role assigned to him in this system, which sets the prerequisites for the formation of the ideology of capitalism. The inability to take a holistic view of reality, that is, to understand it as a specific totality, is the basis of capitalist ideology, where there is always a place of accident that makes itself known in unforeseen crises and failures of the system. Lukach problems a special type of cultural subject, who being between rationality and irrationality of capitalism, is able to realize its violent nature and undermine the foundations of capitalist culture. The class consciousness of the proletariat opens up an opportunity to take the point of view of totality, i.e. to see the world as a whole, rather than as an isolated, fragmented, random series of singularities. Having realized itself as a class, the proletariat, being the subject-object of history, is able to combine the practice of revolution and the theory of philosophy as a condition of radical changes.
32
Nayak, Bhabani Shankar. "Bhagavad Gita and Hindu modes of capitalist accumulation in India". Society and Business Review 13, n.º 2 (9 de julho de 2018): 151–64. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/sbr-09-2017-0071.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
Purpose The paper aims to understand and expand the idea of capitalist accumulation process from social structures of accumulation theory to religious structures of accumulation within the Indian context. It analyses the philosophical tenets of Hindu religious philosophy as outlined in the Bhagavad Gita. It argues that the ideological narratives within the Bhagavad Gita are concomitant with the logic of capitalism. Design/methodology/approach The paper draws its methodological lineage to nonlinear historical narrative around the concept and construction of Asiatic modes of production debate. The paper follows discourse analysis to locate how the Hindu religion as outlined in Bhagavad Gita provides philosophical foundation to capitalism in India. Findings The Bhagavad Gita (Songs of God) gives social and spiritual legitimacy to a specific form of production and accumulation processes by rationalizing and justifying socio-economic stratification based on eternal inequality. The paper focuses on the interface between cardinal principles of Hindu religion as outlined in the Bhagavad Gita and capitalist modes of social and economic processes in India. Originality/value The paper aims to advance a new concept called “Hindu modes of accumulation” by advancing the theoretical understanding of the theological processes in the Hindu religion, which reinforces capitalism and capitalist social relations in India.
33
Lohmann, Georg. "Normative und rechtsstaatliche Kapitalismuskritiken und ihre Verdrängung bei Marx". Deutsche Zeitschrift für Philosophie 66, n.º 4 (25 de setembro de 2018): 429–65. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/dzph-2018-0033.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
Abstract The essay is a critical revision of various of Marx’s approaches in his analysis of capitalism in “Das Kapital”. One can distinguish immanent, normative critiques from transcendental and objectivistic ones. The review of the normative standards used in each case leads to the questions of how Marx determined and used the relationships of justice and law and the capitalist mode of production. Orthodox Marxist views (most recently C. Menke) claim that Marx did not criticise capital as unjust and understood the law of capital only as private law that stabilised domination. Against this, it is shown that he certainly bases his “critical presentation” on an (almost Kantian) constitutional (“rechtsstaatliches”) concept of private law and public law. Thus the “popular prejudice” of “human equality”, defined by Marx as an epochal and systematic condition of the capitalist exchange of goods, becomes apparent as a covert reference to the historical (America, French Revolution), public-law declarations of human rights. And in the chapter “Struggle for the length of the working day” Marx presents the decisions of this dispute between “equal rights” first and foremost in the systematic historical actions of the constitutional powers (legislature, executive and judiciary). At the same time, however, he attempts to ironise and defame this public-law and deliberative, democratic dispute and then to misinterpret it as a violent “civil war”. Because Marx in his further presentation ignores this legal-democratic dispute, including a potential human-rights critique and (possible!) future regulation of capitalism, focussing instead on objectivist concepts of history and development, he can only insufficiently grasp the still challenging relationship between democracy and capitalism.
34
Arnold, N. Scott. "Marx, Central Planning, and Utopian Socialism". Social Philosophy and Policy 6, n.º 2 (1989): 160–99. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0265052500000686.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
Marx believed that what most clearly distinguished him and Engels from the nineteenth-century French socialists was that their version (or vision) of socialism was “scientific” while the latters' was Utopian. What he intended by this contrast is roughly the following: French socialists such as Proudhon and Fourier constructed elaborate visions of a future socialist society without an adequate understanding of existing capitalist society. For Marx, on the other hand, socialism was not an idea or an ideal to be realized, but a natural outgrowth of the existing capitalist order. Marx's historical materialism is a systematic attempt to discover the laws governing the inner dynamics of capitalism and class societies generally. Although this theory issues in a prediction of the ultimate triumph of socialism, it is a commonplace that Marx had little to say about the details of post-capitalist society. Nevertheless, some of its features can be discerned from his critical analysis of capitalism and what its replacement entails.
35
UTIUZH, Irina, Nataliia KOVTUN, Svitlana HREBIN, Fedir VLASENKO e Valeriya VOLKOVA. "The Evolutionary Mechanisms for Tolerance and Social Humanism Development in Education and Medicine: A Post-Capitalist Discourse". WISDOM 25, n.º 1 (25 de março de 2023): 107–17. http://dx.doi.org/10.24234/wisdom.v25i1.980.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
The article is concerned with the substantive nature of late capitalism, which determines all spheres of social existence. It is clarified that neoliberal ideology forms a special type of socio-cultural relations, in which the politics’ technocratic nature disregards humanitarian and cultural aspects and doubts the very existence of the social. Under the circumstances of IT intensified development and real crisis of capitalism, the fundamental process of human-human interaction is ignored, consequently resulting in the loss of the human’s fundamental feature, that is, his sociality. Socio-philosophical research in modern realities is assigned to actualize the issues of spiritual production related to preservation of the social as the ontological essence of society existence in the future. Therefore, our paper aims to analyze the socio-productive function of education and medicine in the formation of a humanitarian and anthropological model of preserving social partnership and tolerance in modern society as opposed to the disappointing and disturbing experience of chronic social pathologies, medicalization and formation of the “remission society” model within the framework of capitalism. The formation of a humanitarian and anthropological model of preserving the social consists in actualizing the evolutionary mechanisms for social humanism, which is the basic characteristic of the post-capitalist reality.
36
Lomasky, Loren E. "Socialism as Classical Political Philosophy". Social Philosophy and Policy 6, n.º 2 (1989): 112–38. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0265052500000662.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
A small puzzle: the terms ‘capitalism’ and ‘socialism’ initially present themselves as contraries, the one affirming what the other rejects. However, once removed from the dictionary, they function otherwise. The theory of capitalism is very much contained within the science of economics. The positive theory of capitalistic institutions, but also its normative superstructure, rest most easily within the language and methodology of the economist. What distinguishes the free market? It is efficient; allocation of factors of production are optimized; individuals maximize their utility; and so on. These are the terms with which justifications of capitalistic production typically begin – begin, and often end.
37
Drinkall, Jacquelene. "Capitalist Telepathics, Psychic Debt and the Search for Collective Intelligence". TOPIA: Canadian Journal of Cultural Studies 45 (1 de outubro de 2022): 133–64. http://dx.doi.org/10.3138/topia-45-002.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
The current state of capitalist digital telepathics, or what I will call telepathy 3.0, presents a serious threat to the prospects of human freedom (Žižek 2020) . Notably, the capitalist race to develop telepathics by Mark Zuckerberg’s Facebook/Meta, Elon Musk’s Neuralink and others represents an intensification of surveillance capitalism (Zuboff 2019 : 206). Through an examination of tech-sector marketing literature and industry critics this article examines contemporary development of Brain Computer Interfaces (BCIs), Neural Interfaces (NIs) and intensified social networks, revealing the expansion of surveillance capitalism and its shift into neurocapitalist telepathics. Is there an alternative to the corporate dystopia promised by telepathy 3.0? This article argues for a more soulful and speculative form of telepathics in fields including art, philosophy, design, architecture, engineering, cybernetics and even psychology. This tradition of prophetic art and human compassion must be nurtured in the face of massive corporate-led investments in predictive technologies.
38
Misesani, Dian, e Ali Mustofa. "Marxist Philosophy and the Themes of Materialism and Capitalism in Dickens’s Hard Times". Ahmad Dahlan Journal of English Studies 9, n.º 1 (13 de maio de 2022): 37–52. http://dx.doi.org/10.26555/adjes.v9i1.37.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
This study aimed to analyze the themes of materialism and capitalism in one of Charles Dickens’s novels entitled Hard Times, which is thick with industrial capitalism. Specifically, it aims at (1) finding the themes of materialism and capitalism by coding themes in terms of words and/or phrases frequency in Dickens’s Hard Times and (2) analyzing and interpreting the theme of materialism and capitalism exposure through the characters’ discursive, setting, and narration in the novel. This research was included in a thematic study that employed a quantitative content analysis. The findings showed that the themes of this novel were materialism and capitalism. Some of the most frequently used words are ‘fact’, ‘money’, and ‘capital’, representing materialism and capitalism. The story of this novel reflects the vice or negative society that happened in England during the 18-19th century as the impacts of industrial capitalism and materialism.
39
Pierson, Chris. "Dream Capitalism". Res Publica 21, n.º 4 (2 de novembro de 2015): 383–95. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11158-015-9299-5.
Texto completo da fonte
40
Rutland, Peter. "Capitalism and Socialism: How Can they be Compared?" Social Philosophy and Policy 6, n.º 1 (1988): 197–227. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0265052500002740.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
How is one to set about the task of comparing capitalism and socialism in a systematic fashion? The contest between capitalism and socialism has many facets. It is both an intellectual debate about the relative merits of models of hypothetical social systems and a real and substantive historical struggle between two groups of states seen as representing capitalism and socialism. Perhaps the intellectual challenge to capitalism thrown down by Marxist thinkers and the “cold war” contest between the U.S.A. and U.S.S.R. are such diverse phenomena that it is pointless and even misleading to try to treat them as part of a single problem. However, I believe that the dieoretical and historical aspects of the capitalism/socialism issue are directly related. I would argue that a full understanding of, say, the cold war is not possible without understanding the socialist critique of capitalism – and that a purely abstract comparison of capitalist and socialist models would fail to do justice to the historical and empirical essence of these two grand conceptual schemas.In Section I, I expand upon these arguments, seeking to convince Utopian socialists that they should not continue to rely upon invocations of a hypothetical future, but must come up with some empirical examples of what socialism is and how it works. After all, it is more than a hundred years since Marx and Engels railed against Utopian socialists in favor of socialist arguments based on empirical reality. This is not to say that Marx and Engels were crude empiricists, accepting “facts” at face value.
41
Narsiah, Sagie. "Marx and the mirage of change: Notes from South Africa". Human Geography 15, n.º 1 (11 de outubro de 2021): 106–16. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/19427786211047855.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
There is little doubt that the understanding of the dynamics of capitalism has been enriched by Geography. Moreover, geographers utilizing Marxist/Marxian lenses have provided valuable insights into the spatial content of the system. Over the past two decades or so, geographers in no small way have contributed to the demystification of capitalism/capitalist development in its neoliberal incarnation – change as mirage. Furthermore, poverty, inequality, unemployment and related social ills are directly linked to the system. Indeed, they are produced by the system. In this paper, the geographical evolution of the capitalist system in South Africa is examined. Critical thinkers, among them Marxists, influenced the theorization of the relationship(s) between capitalism, apartheid, class and race. In this paper, I focus on the spatial aspects, which in my view have been neglected. I reflect on various historical periods – the apartheid era and the post-apartheid era, in particular. What is apparent is that neoliberalism in South Africa has entered a phase which I label “accumulation by corrupt means”. The class basis of this strategy is examined. Critical (Marxist) geographers are shaped by the direct experiences of material conditions. I describe my experiences in this regard.
42
Miller, David, e D. W. Haslett. "Capitalism with Morality." Philosophical Quarterly 46, n.º 185 (outubro de 1996): 556. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2956378.
Texto completo da fonte
43
Schweickart, David. "Market Socialist Capitalist Roaders: A Comment on Arnold". Economics and Philosophy 3, n.º 2 (outubro de 1987): 308–19. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0266267100002947.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
Scott Arnold's recent paper, “Marx and Market Socialism,” advances a provocative thesis: market socialists are advocating an economic system that has a strong, internally generated tendency to revert to capitalism. They are, in short, “capitalist roaders” (Arnold, 1987).
44
Fuchs, Christian, Sevda Can Arslan e Thomas Allmer. "Critical Perspectives on Digital Capitalism: Theories and Praxis. Introduction to the Special Issue". tripleC: Communication, Capitalism & Critique. Open Access Journal for a Global Sustainable Information Society 22, n.º 1 (22 de abril de 2024): 140–47. http://dx.doi.org/10.31269/triplec.v22i1.1498.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
Digital capitalism matters. Digital capitalism shapes our lives. Digital capitalism needs to be better understood. We need critical theories of digital capitalism. We need to better understand praxes that challenge digital capitalism and aim at fostering digital democracy and digital socialism. tripleC’s special issue on “Critical Perspectives on Digital Capitalism: Theories and Praxis” wants to contribute to establishing foundations of critical theories and the philosophy of praxis in the light of digital capitalism. This article introduces the topic and provides an overview of the special issue.
45
Makarova, Anna F. "Criticism of capitalism and socialism in the philosophy of Nikolai Berdyaev". Izvestiya of Saratov University. New Series. Series: Philosophy. Psychology. Pedagogy 21, n.º 3 (24 de setembro de 2021): 263–67. http://dx.doi.org/10.18500/1819-7671-2021-21-3-263-267.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
Philosophical understanding of the economy and economics is not the main, but significant topic of the reflections of Russian religious philosophers. It is important to trace the specifics of the formation of the Russian view on the economy and economics, on the basic principles of the economic systems’ structure (among which we can single out capitalism and socialism), since the interpretation of Russian thinkers, including N. А. Berdyaev, cannot be included in the mainstream of Western economic thought. The article examines the criticism of capitalism and socialism in the post-revolutionary works of Nikolai Berdyaev, highlights the key contradictions of the two basic principles of economic organization with the post-revolutionary views of the thinker, which were significantly strengthened after the revolutionary events of 1917; these views can be conditionally called socialist-personalistic. Inheriting the tradition of Russian thought, Berdyaev unequivocally rejects the capitalist principles (in many respects this attitude was formed by the period of his legal Marxism), while he assesses socialist concepts ambiguously, with a certain amount of sympathy for the very socialist formulation of the problem of justice and the fight against “slavery”, exploitation of a man by a man. The article indicates the main line of criticism of Christian socialism by Berdyaev, and also describes his preferred variant of socialism, that he called “social personalism”.
46
Vrousalis, Nicholas. "Free Productive Agency: Reasons, Recognition, Socialism". Philosophical Topics 48, n.º 2 (2020): 265–84. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/philtopics202048223.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
This paper argues that recognition is, fundamentally, a relationship between a person and a reason. The recognizer acts for a reason, in the interpersonal case, only when she takes the recognizee’s rational intentions—intentions whose content is favored by reasons—as reasons. Free agency, on this view, is a rational power to act for reasons: the recognizer’s disposition to take the recognizee’s rational intentions as reasons across relevant possible worlds in which she forms these intentions. On the basis of this generic account of free agency, I argue that free productive agency is a rational power to produce for reasons: the recognizer’s disposition to take the rational productive intentions of the recognizee as reasons across relevant possible worlds in which she forms these intentions. But capitalism makes it impossible to satisfy this requirement, for it subjects the taking of reasons to the realization of profit. So capitalism makes capitalist and worker unfree and the realization of free productive agency impossible.
47
Kukathas, Chandran. "THE CULTURAL CONTRADICTIONS OF SOCIALISM". Social Philosophy and Policy 20, n.º 1 (17 de dezembro de 2002): 18–37. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0265052503201023.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
While no one has yet announced the death of capitalism, reports of its imminent demise have been as numerous as they have been exaggerated. Such reports have usually been bolstered by thoughtful analyses of the fundamental contradictions of capitalism, which was expected to come sliding—if not crashing—down under the weight of its own inconsistencies. Leaving aside Karl Marx's own predictions, twentieth-century analysts as diverse as Joseph Schumpeter, Daniel Bell, and Jurgen Habermas have asserted that the contradictions of capitalism could only mean that its days were numbered. Alas, all that has been established by these analyses is that predictive failure is no impediment to market success: either the consumer's demand for such theories of capitalism's failures is naturally robust, or supply continues to generate its own demand.
48
Muheramtohadi, Singgih. "PERBANDINGAN ANTARA FILSAFAT EKONOMI ISLAM DAN BARAT". JURNAL STIE SEMARANG 10, n.º 3 (1 de novembro de 2018): 73–92. http://dx.doi.org/10.33747/stiesmg.v10i3.211.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
Economic philosophy is an undeveloped theme in department of economy. Whereas during the 20th Century there is a clash of two big ideologies that caused by differences in economic philosophy, they are the capitalism and the socialism. These Two big streams often used as comparison object. This Writing, look at the two big streams in a same frame, that is the thought that arise in western worldview which different with Islamic worldview. So it is interesting to study the comparison between philosophy of Islamic economic and western economic through branchs of philosopy, they are ontology, epistemology and axiology.
49
Murthy, Viren. "Book review: Ontology of Production: Three Essays, written by Nishida Kitarō". Historical Materialism 22, n.º 2 (25 de setembro de 2014): 219–36. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/1569206x-12341357.
Texto completo da fonteResumo:
This is a review-essay on William Haver’s recent translation of three essays by Nishida Kitarō in a volume entitled Ontologies of Production. Nishida is one of the founders of the famous Kyoto School of philosophy and, while his philosophy is not really Marxist, Haver attempts to bring Nishida into dialogue with Marx in his Introduction and through his selection of essays to translate. I attempt to situate Haver’s translation in a brief discussion of a recent debate on how to write modern Japanese intellectual history and, through this examination, I suggest a framework for analysing modern intellectual history drawing on the work of Harry Harootunian, Moishe Postone and Jacques Bidet. In short, this framework attempts to relate the production of ideas to the temporal dynamic associated with capital, the commodity-form and other related mediations that make up the modern global capitalist system. Then I turn to Haver’s Introduction and translations and both explain some of the key concepts of Nishida and show how, using the framework that I outlined, Nishida’s work can be conceived of as failing to understand its own conditions of possibility in the multiple mediations of capitalism. For this reason, Nishida’s work, like many other romantic critiques of capitalism, criticises the abstractions of modernity at an abstract level, failing to account for the mediations of capitalism such as class and the commodity.
50
Pluta, Leonard, e Santo Dodaro. "KEYNESIAN METHODOLOGY, SOCIAL PHILOSOPHY AND UTOPIAN CAPITALISM". Humanomics 8, n.º 2 (fevereiro de 1992): 49–69. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/eb006129.
Texto completo da fonte