On the relation between Menger and Aristotle ? a French-Argentine Dialogue

CAMPAGNOLO; CRESPO, RICARDO F.

Buenos Aires

Congreso; ESHET Argentina Conference; 2012

ESHET y UNGS

How did Carl Menger, the founder of the Austrian School of Economics, read Aristotle? This is an ?old had? debate within Mengerian scholarship ? since Kraus, via Barry Smith, Erich Streissler, down to the present authors, among many others. New elements were added through archives by Emil Kauder and Gilles Campagnolo, who co-authors the present proposal with Ricardo Crespo. In his essay published in 2003, Crespo defended the idea that Menger would not be an ?orthodox Aristotelian?. Menger may have wished to flaunt as Aristotelian because of the authority reckoned to the Ancient in 19th century Austrian Academia. But his theories would show disadjustments on major issues, such as, Crespo argued : 1) Menger?s classification of sciences (triadic: theory, history, practical economics ? see Untersuchungen, 1883, with a superstructural dimension added in 1889) would not fit the Aristotelian frame; 2) ?testability? of the results acquired through exact science is debated within the Austrian school (especially Misesians and others) while foreign to Aristotle ; 3) what rigorous science is depends on definitions, which are different in Menger and Aristotle. Moreover, in the present proposal, we add the following issues : 4) in the frame of the ?Methodenstreit (Dispute Over Methods)?, reference to Aristotle mixes rhetorics and analysis; 5) Menger?s theory of monetary exchange shows he opposed Aristotle?s view that ?one has the same before and after the exchange?; 6) clearly, some arguments may be solved using available archives, which we will do here, while entertaining a fruitful debate viewed as an essay in scholarly French-Argentine dialogue. The co-authors first met in Vancouver in 2000, confronting views on Aristotle and Menger in a session on the ?basics of Austrian economics?. A staunch duellist, Crespo deliberately set the matter in a provocative paper in 2003 at Aix-en-Provence, where Campagnolo had joined a research-unit of CNRS (now a Senior member at Aix-Marseilles School of Economics). Crespo wrote that « [his] paper has raised doubts about the purity of [Menger?s] Aristotelianism. [...] Menger uses Aristotle?s concepts ; he knows Aristotle?s philosophy, and he applied it to the social field. However, his knowledge does not have the precision of a professionnal philosopher. Although he commands Aristotle?s language, he does not completely capture his spirit. » Campagnolo, educated as a classical philosopher and an economist, retorted. The dialogue went on, capturing more arguments and bringing new publications, yet none together yet. The ESHET-Argentine Conference is the chance of setting the matter in front of the community, using both literature and unpublished archives. In this paper, first, Crespo summarizes his arguments of the 2003 paper (SECTION I). Then, Campagnolo presents the critique of Crespo, recapitulating his paper with Lordon (2011) (SECTION II). Third, Crespo adds his Reply (SECTION III) and the paper ends with a new reply by Campagnolo (SECTION IV).