Business schools summary and evolution of thought
In this article “ Business schools summary and evolution of thought” We will see in detail some characteristics of the major business schools and the general evolution of thought.
Economic activity is not autonomous and depends on human action, so is present since ancient times. The history of economic thought studied so the evolution of the thought of scholars over time, in their analysis of reality and the search for appropriate tools to interpret it.
Various economists following one another in time or contemporaries are placed and grouped into school of thought, grouped according to some degree of consistency in the approach to various topics related to economic reality.
The history of economic thought can be divided into three specific periods:
- Fragmented thinking: from its origins to the early 1500. The name of this period is due to the fact that there are scholars who specifically deal the economic problem. Information about the economy are in historical artworks, philosophers, moralists,… in cursorily.
- Prescientific period: This time we can situate between the beginning of 1500 and the 1776, When it published the first systematic work of economics the “Wealth of Nations” by Adam Smith. This period includes the mercantilism And the physiocracy
- Scientific period: runs from 1776 to the present day, the theoretical bases of the economy are supported by systematic analysis of the facts and the creation of a scientific method. In this period we find the classical school, that Socialist, the historic, the neo-classical, the Keynesian school And the monetarist school.
The fragmented period
Scholars of the ancient world and middle ages were unable to develop an autonomous economic laws collection. We find anyway of economic matrix, However are inserted in other contexts, such as the discourse of historians on economic resources of different peoples or the discourse of philosophers about good governance and proper behavior of individuals.
Only around the 1200 with the General recovery in economic activity after the great crisis of the year 1000 and the continuous barbarian migrations, develops an interest in the study of economic phenomena (from a moral perspective)
Economic philosophical thinking of the epoch can be divided into two main branches: the strand “collectivist” referring to Plato's thinking and that “individualistic” proposed especially by Aristotle and by Roman jurists.
Collectivism was ideal and aristocratic in nature, founded on the sentencing of individual enrichment, that implies the inequality within the community. Only with the communion of goods materials, so even the abolition of private property and the egalitarian distribution of goods you can reach an ideal situation.
L’ individualism implies the desire for individual enrichment to stimulate economic activity.
The medieval economic thought
The economic basis for the medieval economic thought was provided by Aristotle. The main ideals of this period are expressed in “Summa Theologica” by Thomas Aquinas, whose purpose was not to analyze the economic mechanisms, but to find out what was right for man subject to directives of Catholic morality.
Here is an extract from the “Summa Theologica” related to men and justice
Article 1 – If men would be born in the State of original justice
It seems that humans are not born in the State of Justice. In fact:
- Hugh of S. Victor [De sacram. 1, 6, 24] writes: “The first man, before SIN, certainly would have thrown the children without sin, though without transmitting the legacy of Justice paterna”.
- As the Apostle [RM 5, 16 SS.], justice depends on grace. Now, Grace is not transmitted, Why else would the natural order, but is infused directly from God. So the children would not be born in the State of Justice.
- Justice is headquartered in soul. But the soul is not derived by generation. So even the justice would be passed on from father to son.
- Anselmo [De conc. Virg. 10] writes that “If man had not sinned, the sons UGM would receive justice, together with the rational soul”.
For law of nature man raises a similar to himself in this case being. So in all the accidents arising from the nature of the species requires that the children resemble their parents, unless there is a fault in the operation of nature; defect that was impossible in the State of innocence. As for individual accidents is not necessary that the children resemble their parents. Now the original justice, When it was created the first man, It was a “accident” from the nature of the species – not as a reality generated by the essential principles of the species, but as a gift from God to all of nature -. And this appears from the fact that opposites belong to a single genus; now the original sin, as opposed to do justice, It is called sin of nature, Why is passed on from father to son. That is why the children would have been similar to their parents even in the original justice.
Solution of the difficulties:
- Ugo's claim [by S. Victor] VA related not to the suit of Justice, but the works done.
- Some say that children then they wouldn't be born with free justice, principle of merit, but with the original justice. But since the Foundation of the original justice, He created man, supernatural subordination of reason in God, and this is achieved with sanctifying grace, as it turns out [q. 95, in. 1], You must state that, If babies were born in the original justice, would be born in grace. Even the first man, as has been said [IB.], It was created in grace. Nor for that grace would be natural: Since it would be passed on by virtue of the seed, but would be given to humans as soon as infused the rational soul. As well as, as soon as the body is willing, the rational soul is infused by God, that however is not derived by generation.
- So is resolved the third difficulty.