K. Polanyi: Conoscenza scientifica e visione naturalistica nell'economics. Un'ipotesi di lavoro

As is well known, Polanyi's work promoted an intense debate on modern capitalism: on the peculiar features of the market economy, on the effects it has had on the configuration of social relations and on its influence on man's activities. In order to promote new analytical perspectives in social sciences, Polanyi focuses on the scientific distortions connected with the naturalistic view of the world adopted by economics, which – through the use of the category of homo oeconomicus – de-historicizes both the features of man and those of the economic system in which he acts. According to Polanyi, only a historically oriented research can explain the motives and aims of the individuals within an institutionalized environment, overcoming the analytical limits of mainstream economics. However, in his essay How to Make Use of the Social Sciences and in other works some epistemological uncertainties emerge in the pursuit of these objectives, since he acquires as a point of reference Menger, who moves in an opposite scientific direction. In fact, Mengerian reflection on the role of institutions does not change the approach of "mainstream monism", nor does it lead to a significant reconsideration of the relationship between economics and other social sciences, such as that proposed by Polanyi.众所周知，卡尔·波兰尼（Karl Polanyi）的著作引发了一场关于现代资本主义的热烈讨论：议题涵盖市场经济的独特属性、市场经济对社会关系构型的影响，以及其对人类活动的塑造作用。为推动社会科学领域的新分析视角，波兰尼着重剖析了经济学所秉持的自然主义世界观所带来的学术偏差：经济学借助“经济人（homo oeconomicus）”范畴，将人类属性与人类所处经济体系的特征均进行了去历史化处理。在波兰尼看来，唯有以历史为导向的研究，方能阐释制度化语境下个体的动机与目标，从而突破主流经济学的分析局限。然而，在其论文《如何运用社会科学》及其他著作中，波兰尼在践行上述目标的过程中却暴露出一些认识论层面的模糊之处——这是因为他将学术立场锚定在了持相反科学取向的门格尔（Menger）身上。事实上，门格尔学派对制度角色的反思，并未改变“主流一元论”的研究路径，也未能推动经济学与其他社会科学之间的关系得到实质性重构，而这正是波兰尼所倡导的研究方向。