The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics

2018 Edition
| Editors: Macmillan Publishers Ltd

Interests

  • Albert O. Hirschman
Reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-349-95189-5_1193

Abstract

‘Interest’ or ‘interests’ is one of the most central and controversial concepts in economics and, more generally, in social science and history. Since coming into widespread use in various European countries around the latter part of the 16th century as essentially the same Latinderived word (intérêt, interesse, etc.), the concept has stood for the fundamental forces, based on the drive for self-preservation and self-aggrandizement, that motivate or should motivate the actions of the prince or the state, of the individual, and later of groups of people occupying a similar social or economic position (classes, interest groups). When related to the individual, the concept has at times had a very inclusive meaning, encompassing interest in honour, glory, self-respect, and even after-life, while at other times it became wholly confined to the drive for economic advantage. The esteem in which interest-motivated behaviour is held has also varied drastically. The term was originally pressed into service as a euphemism serving, already in the late Middle Ages, to make respectable an activity, the taking of interest on loans, that had long been considered contrary to divine law and known as the sin of usury. In its wider meanings, the term at times achieved enormous prestige as key to a workable and peaceful social order. But it has also been attacked as degrading to the human spirit and corrosive of the foundations of society. An inquiry into these multiple meanings and appreciations is in effect an exploration of much of economic history and in particular of the history of economic and political doctrine in the West over the past four centuries.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access

Bibliography

  1. Ball, T. 1983. The ontological presuppositions and political consequences of a social science. In Changing social science, ed. D.R. Sabia Jr. and J.T. Wallulis. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
  2. Boulding, K.E. 1973. The economy of love and fear: A preface to grants economics. Belmont: Wadsworth.Google Scholar
  3. Burke, E. 1790. Reflections on the revolution in France. Chicago: Regnery, 1955.Google Scholar
  4. Carlyle, T. 1843. Past and present. New York: New York University Press, 1977.Google Scholar
  5. Collard, D. 1978. Altruism and economy: A study in non-selfish economics. Oxford: Robertson.Google Scholar
  6. Collini, S., D. Winch, and J. Burrow. 1983. That noble science of politics: A study in nineteenth-century intellectual history. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Hamilton, A. 1784. Letters from Phocion, number I. In The works of Alexander Hamilton, ed. John C. Hamilton. New York: C.S. Francis, 1851, Vol. II, 322.Google Scholar
  8. Himmelfarb, G. 1984. The idea of poverty: England in the early industrial age. New York: Knopf.Google Scholar
  9. Hirschman, A.O. 1977. The passions and the interests: Political arguments for capitalism before its triumph. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Hirschman, A.O. 1982a. Rival interpretations of market society: Civilizing, destructive, or feeble? Journal of Economic Literature 20(4): 1463–1484.Google Scholar
  11. Hirschman, A.O. 1982b. Shifting involvements: Private interest and public action. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Hirschman, A.O. 1985. Against parsimony: Three easy ways of complicating some categories of economic discourse. Economics and Philosophy 1: 7–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hume, D. 1742. In Essays moral, political and literary, ed. T.H. Green and T.H. Grose. London: Longmans, 1898.Google Scholar
  14. Keynes, J.M. 1936. The general theory of employment interest and money. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  15. Macaulay, T.B. 1829. Mill’s essay on government. In Utilitarian logic and politics, ed. J. Lively and J. Rees. Oxford: Clarendon, 1978.Google Scholar
  16. McPherson, M.S. 1984. Limits on self-seeking: The role of morality in economic life. In Neoclassical political economy, ed. D.C. Colander, 71–85. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.Google Scholar
  17. Margolis, H. 1982. Selfishness, altruism and rationality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Meinecke, F. 1924. Die Idee der Staatsräson in der Neueren Geschichte. Munich: Oldenburg.Google Scholar
  19. Mill, J. 1820. Essay on government. In Utilitarian logic and politics, ed. J. Lively and J. Rees. Oxford: Clarendon, 1978.Google Scholar
  20. O’Donnell, G. 1986. On the convergences of Hirschman’s exit, voice and loyalty and shifting involvements. In Development, democracy and the art of trespassing: Essays in honor of A.O. Hirschman, ed. A. Foxley et al. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.Google Scholar
  21. Phelps, E.S. (ed.). 1975. Altruism, morality and economic theory. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
  22. Pocock, J.G.A. 1982. The political economy of Burke’s analysis of the French revolution. Historical Journal 25: 331–349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Rohan, H., Duc de. 1638. De l’interêt des princes et états de la chrétiénité. Paris: Pierre Margat.Google Scholar
  24. Schelling, T.C. 1984. Choice and consequence. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  25. Schumpeter, J.A. 1911. The theory of economic development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1951.Google Scholar
  26. Sen, A. 1977. Rational fools: A critique of the behavioral foundations of economic theory. Philosophy and Public Affairs 6(4): 317–344.Google Scholar
  27. Smith, A. 1776. In An inquiry into the nature and causes of the wealth of nations, ed. E. Cannan. New York: Modern Library, 1937.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Steuart, J. 1767. In Inquiry into the principles of political oeconomy, ed. A.S. Skinner. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1966.Google Scholar
  29. Winch, D. 1985. The Burke–Smith problem and late eighteenth century political and economic thought. Historical Journal 28(1): 231–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Macmillan Publishers Ltd. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Albert O. Hirschman
    • 1
  1. 1.