IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/eujhet/v20y2013i5p812-844.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Taking the modern for nature: methodological individualism as an interesting mistake

Author

Listed:
  • Robert Urquhart

Abstract

Marx claims that what early modern writers took as the isolated individual in nature, was actually the individual in modern civil society. This is a mistake, but an interesting one. The paper traces the idea of the methodological individualist isolated individual in Hobbes, Locke, Bentham, Austrian and neoclassical economics. The idea is untenable because it prevents a distinction between the individual and the economy in which it supposedly pursues its interest. But the mistake pushes beyond itself, pointing to a tenable alternative, plural individuality. The alternative view is thus grounded in its contrary, rather than simply rejecting it.

Suggested Citation

  • Robert Urquhart, 2013. "Taking the modern for nature: methodological individualism as an interesting mistake," The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(5), pages 812-844, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:eujhet:v:20:y:2013:i:5:p:812-844
    DOI: 10.1080/09672567.2011.653880
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/09672567.2011.653880
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/09672567.2011.653880?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    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. Dieter Bögenhold, 2018. "Schumpeter’s Split Between “Pure” Economics and Institutional Economics: Why Methodological Individualism Was Not Fully Considered," International Advances in Economic Research, Springer;International Atlantic Economic Society, vol. 24(3), pages 253-264, August.

    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:taf:eujhet:v:20:y:2013:i:5:p:812-844. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/REJH20 .

    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.