This article is devoted to a critical reconstruction of Karl Polanyi’s institutional theory and its ethical consequences. Starting with the distinction between the formal (neoclassical) and the substantive (institutional) understanding of the economy, the article proceeds to discuss the main forms of institutional integration of economic life described by Polanyi: reciprocity (symmetry), redistribution (centricity), and exchange (market). In this context, the author examines the connection between the work of Karl Polanyi and the economic anthropology represented by the works of Richard Thurnwald and Bronisław Malinowski. The author argues that three main forms of institutional integration of economic life introduced by Karl Polanyi can be interpreted both as analytical tools to describe institutions and as a grand scheme for the classification of different economic systems. The next section of the article is devoted to a comparison between the institutional theories of Douglass North and Karl Polanyi. For North, the main explanatory category is the idea of transaction costs, whereas for Polanyi the key idea is that of the social embeddedness of the economy. When speaking about the social embeddedness of the economy, Polanyi draws our attention to the inseparable bonds which exist between economic institutions on the one hand, and culture, social structure and politics on the other. This theoretical difference between North and Polanyi, the author argues, has important ethical consequences. If Polanyi is right, then institutions are not only alternative solutions to a certain economic problem (i.e. the efficient allocation of resources, the reduction of transaction costs) but above all they are the embodiment of different conceptions of a good life. In conclusion, the author emphasizes the political dimension of Karl Polanyi’s institutional theory, along with its intriguing promise of liberating our social and political life from the economistic fallacy, that is, from the unfortunate tendency to think about society in market terms.
The article is an intervention into the ongoing debate about the identity of political science. Drawing on the views of Charles Taylor, it argues for the interpretive model of political science. Interpretive political science maintains that (1) political practices and institutions are constituted by intersubjective meaning; (2) it is impossible to draw a clear-cut distinction between normative and empirical theory since any non-trivial political theory is bound to reveal some value slope. The article argues that the interpretative approach not only can provide a better explanation of current research practice within political science but also opens promising vistas for future research.
PL
Artykuł jest głosem w dyskusji o tożsamości naukowej politologii. Odwołując się do poglądów Charlesa Taylora, autor opowiada się za interpretacyjnym modelem nauki o polityce. Interpretacjoności utrzymują, że (1) praktyki i instytucje polityczne są konstytuowane przez intersubiektywnie podzielane znaczenia; (2) nie można przeprowadzić ścisłego rozróżnienia między teorią empiryczną a teorią normatywną, gdyż każda nietrywialna teoria politologiczna wykazuje określone nachylenie wartościujące. Zdaniem autora interpretacjonizm lepiej niż pozytywizm wyjaśnia praktykę badawczą w obrębie nauk politycznych i otwiera interesujące horyzonty na przyszłość.
This article is maintained in the convention of a working paper. It aims to sketch an interpretation of the Polish political transformation from the perspective of Karl Polanyi’s theory, particularly his concept of double movement. According to the proposed reading, the anti-liberal turn initiated by the electoral victory of the Law and Justice party in 2015 is a response to the commodification of labour, land and money as a result of neoliberal economic reforms.
PL
Niniejszy artykuł utrzymany jest w konwencji working paper, a jego celem jest naszkicowanie interpretacji polskiej transformacji ustrojowej z punktu widzenia teorii Karla Polanyi’ego, w szczególności zaś jego koncepcji ruchu dwukierunkowego. W myśl proponowanego odczytania antyliberalny zwrot zapoczątkowany przez zwycięstwo wyborcze Prawa i Sprawiedliwości w 2015 roku jest odpowiedzią na utowarowienie pracy, ziemi i pieniądza wskutek neoliberalnych reform gospodarczych.
This article is devoted to a critical reconstruction of Karl Polanyi’s institutional theory and its ethical consequences. Starting with the distinction between the formal (neoclassical) and the substantial (institutional) understanding of the economy, the article proceeds to discuss the main forms of institutional integration of economic life described by Polanyi: reciprocity (symmetry), redistribution (centricity), and exchange (market). In this context, the author examines the connection between the work of Karl Polanyi and the economic anthropology represented by the works of Richard Thurnwald and Bronisław Malinowski. The author argues that three main forms of institutional integration of economic life introduced by Karl Polanyi can be interpreted both as analytical tools to describe institutions and as a grand scheme for the classification of different economic systems. The next section of the article is devoted to a comparison between the institutional theories of Douglass North and Karl Polanyi. For North, the main explanatory category is the idea of transaction costs, whereas for Polanyi the key idea is that of the social embeddedness of the economy. When speaking about the social embeddedness of the economy, Polanyi draws our attention to the inseparable bonds which exist between economic institu tions on the one hand, and culture, social structure and politics on the other hand. This theoretical difference between North and Polanyi, the author argues, has important ethical consequences. If Polanyi is right, then institutions are not only alternative solutions to a certain economic problem (i.e. the efficient allocation of resources, the reduction of transaction costs) but above all they are the embodiment of different conceptions of a good life. In conclusion, the author emphasizes the political dimension of Karl Polanyi’s institutional theory with its intriguing promise of liberating our social and political life from the economic fallacy, that is, from the unfortunate tendency to think about society in market terms.
The starting point of the following article is Richard J. Bernstein’s book “Restructuring of Social and Political Theory”, which has been recently published in Polish translation by Wydawnictwo Dolnośląskiej Szkoły Wyższej. Based on Bernstein’s book, the authors analyze the quality of Polish political science research. They refer to uncritical acceptance of naturalist interpretation of social science, while being equally critical about the dominant expert discourse in political science. Authors formulate their conclusion that the genuine restructuring of Polish political science can be based on revival of the notion of critique.
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.