Sgambati, Stefano (2013) Money. Groundwork for a study of social relations, power and institutional change. [Tesi di dottorato]

[img]
Preview
Documento PDF
Money. Groundwork for a study of social relations, power and institutional change [S. Sgambati, 2013].pdf

Download (1MB) | Preview
[error in script] [error in script]
Item Type: Tesi di dottorato
Lingua: English
Title: Money. Groundwork for a study of social relations, power and institutional change
Creators:
CreatorsEmail
Sgambati, Stefanoste.sgambati@gmail.com
Date: 1 April 2013
Number of Pages: 195
Institution: Università degli Studi di Napoli Federico II
Department: Scienze Sociali
Scuola di dottorato: Scienze sociali
Dottorato: Sociologia e ricerca sociale
Ciclo di dottorato: 25
Coordinatore del Corso di dottorato:
nomeemail
Morlicchio, Enricaenmorlic@unina.it
Tutor:
nomeemail
Ventrone, Oresteventrone@unina.it
Date: 1 April 2013
Number of Pages: 195
Uncontrolled Keywords: Critical Theory - Monetary Theory
Settori scientifico-disciplinari del MIUR: Area 13 - Scienze economiche e statistiche > SECS-P/01 - Economia politica
Area 13 - Scienze economiche e statistiche > SECS-P/04 - Storia del pensiero economico
Area 14 - Scienze politiche e sociali > SPS/03 - Storia delle istituzioni politiche
Area 14 - Scienze politiche e sociali > SPS/07 - Sociologia generale
Date Deposited: 10 Apr 2013 10:28
Last Modified: 23 Jul 2014 12:11
URI: http://www.fedoa.unina.it/id/eprint/9337
DOI: 10.6092/UNINA/FEDOA/9337

Abstract

The intellectual debate on money is often portrayed as a rather Manichean diatribe between two opposing traditions: on the one hand the orthodox, grounded in a ‘real’ analysis, and championing the primacy of a commodity-money; on the other hand the heterodox, based on a ‘nominal’ analysis, and advocating the primacy of a credit-money. Both traditions claim to know better the nature of money: whereas the orthodox envisages in the medium of exchange the ultimate essence of money, the heterodox attributes ontological primacy to the measure of value – or else the ‘money of account’. And yet, neither of the two traditions is concerned with comprehending the significance of money: why it is important to us, why we recognise it first of all as value. This work therefore tries to outline a comprehensive discourse on the significance of money as value. In particular, the first part is dedicated to a critique of heterodox and alternative theories of money, including Geoffrey Ingham’s major sociological contribution, The nature of money (2004). The second part instead engages with an ontological and epistemological problematisation of the phenomenon, coupled with a brief phenomenology of money 'out of nothing' and a genealogy of the currency.

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item