They may analyze the motives of the laborer or of the manufacturer,
but those motives and impulses interest them not as contents of
consciousness, but only as acts which are directed toward a goal. The
aim toward which these point by their meaning, and not the elements
from which they are made up or their causes and effects, is the
substance of such economic studies. For such a subjective account of
the meaning of actions the only problem is, indeed, the correct
understanding and interpretation, and the consistent psychologist who
knows that it is not his task to interpret but to explain has no right
to raise any questions here. It is, therefore, only a confusing
disturbance, if a really psychological, causal explanation is mixed
into the interpretation of such a system of will-acts and purposes. It
is true we find this confusion in many modern works on economics.
Economists know that a scientific explanatory study of the human mind
exists, and they have a vague feeling that they have no right to
ignore this real psychology, instead of recognizing that the
psychology really has nothing to do with their particular problem. The
result is that they constantly try to discuss the impulses and
instincts, the hunger and thirst and sexual desire, and the higher
demands for fighting and playing and acquiring, for seeking power and
social influence, as a psychologist would discuss them, referring them
to biological and physiological conditions and explaining them
causally.
Pages:
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215