Author
Listed:
- Jon D WismanProfessor of Economics
Abstract
‘The outstanding discovery of recent historical and anthropological research is that a man’s economy, as a rule, is submerged in his social relationships.’ (Karl Polanyi, 1944, p. 46)‘...all the best business men want to get money, but many of them do not care about it much for its own sake; they want it chiefly as the most convincing proof to themselves and others that they have succeeded.’ (Alfred Marshall 1890, p. 635)‘[T]he competitive order must be partly responsible for making emulation and rivalry the outstanding quality in the character of the Western peoples who have adopted and developed it.’ (Frank Knight, 1999, p. 39)Adam Smith and Thorstein Veblen, divided culturally and by over a century of capitalism’s differing degrees of maturation, analysed the basic institutions of capitalism in radically different manners and came to contrary views as to capitalism’s serviceability to human welfare. Yet, despite their differences, and that Veblen appears not to have read Smith’s principal treatise on human behaviour, The Theory of Moral Sentiments, they shared remarkably similar views as to why humans behave as they do. Both saw humans as seeking self-respect by acquiring approval or social certification from others, often pursued through conspicuous consumption. However, whereas Smith viewed the seeking of status through consumption as stimulating economic dynamism, Veblen viewed it as generating waste and impairing human welfare, claiming work as a socially superior channel for acquiring social and self-respect. Nevertheless, what is broadly common in their theories of human behaviour has great importance for social theory, and especially for addressing the contemporary mistake in wealthy societies of sacrificing important social goals to the pursuit of ever-more material wealth.
Suggested Citation
Jon D WismanProfessor of Economics, 2019.
"Adam Smith and Thorstein Veblen on the Pursuit of Status Through Consumption versus Work,"
Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 43(1), pages 17-36.
Handle:
RePEc:oup:cambje:v:43:y:2019:i:1:p:17-36.
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.
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:43:y:2019:i:1:p:17-36.. 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.