IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/cambje/v40y2016i3p941-960..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Varieties of Capitalism: Some Philosophical and Historical Considerations

Author

Listed:
  • Geoffrey M. Hodgson

Abstract

The literature on varieties of capitalism has stimulated some authors to challenge notions of ‘essentialism’ and even the concept of capitalism itself. This essay argues that the existence of varieties of capitalism does not rule out the need for, or possibility of, specification or definition of that type. Accordingly, ‘capitalism’ is still a viable term. The critique of ‘essentialism’ is also countered, after clarifying its meaning. In particular, a suitably defined ‘essentialism’ does not imply some kind of ontological or explanatory reductionism—‘economic’ or otherwise. But while adopting what are basically Aristotelian arguments about essences, we need to reject Aristotle’s auxiliary notion that variety generally results from temporary deviations from a representative type or trend. Furthermore, capitalism is a historically specific and relatively recent system: we need to develop a classificatory definition of that system that demarcates it from other past or possible social formations.

Suggested Citation

  • Geoffrey M. Hodgson, 2016. "Varieties of Capitalism: Some Philosophical and Historical Considerations," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 40(3), pages 941-960.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:cambje:v:40:y:2016:i:3:p:941-960.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/cje/bev083
    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. Angela Ambrosino & Paolo Silvestri, 2020. "Hodgson: An Institution Across Disciplinary Barriers," Annals of the Fondazione Luigi Einaudi. An Interdisciplinary Journal of Economics, History and Political Science, Fondazione Luigi Einaudi, Torino (Italy), vol. 54(2), pages 329-348, December.
    2. Cheang, Bryan & Lim, Hanniel, 2023. "Institutional diversity and state-led development: Singapore as a unique variety of capitalism," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 182-192.
    3. Andrei Panibratov & Daria Klishevich, 2023. "Emerging market state-owned multinationals: a review and implications for the state capitalism debate," Asian Business & Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 22(1), pages 84-117, February.
    4. Imko Meyenburg, 2022. "A possibilist justification of the ontology of counterfactuals and forecasted states of economies in economic modelling," Working Papers hal-03751205, HAL.
    5. Uddin, Moshfique & Chowdhury, Anup & Anderson, Keith & Chaudhuri, Kausik, 2021. "The effect of COVID – 19 pandemic on global stock market volatility: Can economic strength help to manage the uncertainty?," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 31-44.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:oup:cambje:v:40:y:2016:i:3:p:941-960.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 bibliographic 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/cje .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.