Abstract
For the last 30 years I have been writing a trilogy on Locke’s, Berkeley’s, and Hume’s philosophies of money. With the publication of Clipped Coins. Abused Words and Civil Government; John Locke’s Philosophy of Money and Exciting the Industry of Mankind; George Berkeley’s Philosophy of Money and with the last volume on Hume in preparation, the trilogy is now almost completed.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
- 2.
Quoted in Shell (1982), 139.
- 3.
See Derrida (1992) and Blaug et al. (1995). Though there is ample recognition of the achievements of Locke, Berkeley and Hume in the realm of monetary theory and policy, it is by no means equally spread. The differential attention paid to Locke, Berkeley, and Hume in the history of economics literature can easily be judged by looking at some standard textbooks in the field. Consider Blaug’s (1968). It has 21 index [page] references for Hume, 13 for Locke, and 3 for Berkeley. Spiegel’s textbook (Spiegel 1983), which is more oriented to the humanities, shows a similar differential: 48 index references to Locke, 32 for Hume, and none for Berkeley. I discuss this differential in Caffentzis (2000), 419n.
- 4.
Marx (1970), 78.
- 5.
Johnston (1970), 84.
- 6.
Shell (1982), 4.
- 7.
Shell (1982), 180.
- 8.
Simmel (2000). 53.
- 9.
Simmel (2000), 54.
- 10.
Simmel (2000), 54.
- 11.
Simmel (2000), 54.
- 12.
Simmel (2000), 54.
- 13.
Simmel (2000), 55.
- 14.
For a thorough account of the historical setting of the recoinage crisis see Kelly (1991).
- 15.
Kelly (1991), 412.
- 16.
Kelly (1991), 412.
- 17.
Patrick Hyde Kelly and I in separate works – Locke on Money and Clipped Coins, Abused Words and Civil Government: John Locke’s Philosophy of Money respectively – offered different versions of this two-fold analysis of Locke’s conception of money.
- 18.
Locke (1979), III, v, 8.
- 19.
Kelly (1991), 417, 417, 417, 415, respectively.
- 20.
Locke (1979), IV, iii, 18.
- 21.
Quoted in Kelly (1991), 417.
- 22.
Caffentzis (1989), 70.
- 23.
Marx (1970), 77.
- 24.
My account here is based on Caffentzis (2000).
- 25.
Caffentzis (2000), 274.
- 26.
Caffentzis (2000), 80–100.
- 27.
Caffentzis (2000), 82.
- 28.
Caffentzis (2000), 418.
- 29.
Hont (2008), 243–327.
- 30.
My discussion of Hume’s support of metallic money and his critique of paper-credit, as he called it, can be found in Caffentzis (2008), 146–167.
- 31.
Baier (1991), 103.
- 32.
Hume (1957), 123.
- 33.
Hume (1957), 123.
- 34.
Caffentzis (2008), 164.
- 35.
Wennerlind (2008), 124.
References
Baier, A. A Progress of the Sentiments. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991.
Blaug, M. Economic Theory in Retrospect. Homewood, Il: Richard D. Irwin, 1968.
Blaug, M. et al. The Quantity Theory of Money: From Locke to Keynes and Friedman. Hants, England: Edward Elgar, 1995.
Caffentzis, C.G. Clipped Coins, Abused Words and Civil Government: John Locke’s Philosophy of Money. Brooklyn: Autonomedia, 1989.
Caffentzis, C.G. Exciting the Industry of Mankind: George Berkeley’s Philosophy of Money. Dordrecht: Kluwer, 2000.
Caffentzis, C.G. Hume, Money, and Civilization; Or, Why Was Hume a Metallist? Hume Studies, 27(2) (2001): 301–335.
Caffentzis, C.G. Civilizing the Highlands: Hume, Money, and the Annexing Act. Historical Reflections, 31(1) (2005): 169–194.
Caffentzis, C.G. Fiction or Counterfeit? David Hume’s Interpretations of Paper and Metallic Money in David Hume’s Political Economy, edited by Carl Wennerlind and Margaret Schabas, 146–167. London: Routledge, 2008.
Derrida, J. Given Time: I. Counterfeit Money. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1992.
Hont, I. The “Rich Country-Poor Country” Debate Revisited: The Irish Origins and French Reception of the Hume Paradox in David Hume’s Political Economy, edited by Carl Wennerlind and Margaret Schabas, 243–327. London: Routledge, 2008.
Hume, D. Inquiry Concerning the Principles of Morals. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill, 1957.
Johnston, J. Bishop Berkeley’s Querist in Historical Perspective. Dundalk: Dundalgan, 1970.
Kelly, P.H. Locke on Money, Vols. I and II. Oxford: Clarendon, 1991.
Locke, J. An Essay Concerning Human Understanding, edited by Peter H. Nidditch. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1979. Reference is to Book, Chapter, and Section.
Marx, K. Contribution to a Critique of Political Economy. New York: International Publishers, 1970.
Shell, M. Money, Language, and Thought: Literary and Philosophical Economies from the Medieval to the Modern Era. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1982.
Simmel, G. The Philosophy of Money. London: Routledge, 2000.
Spiegel, HW. The Growth of Economic Thought. Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 1983.
Wennerlind, C. An Artificial Virtue and the Oil of Commerce, David Hume’s Political Economy, edited by Carl Wennerlind and Margaret Schabas, 105–126. London: Routledge, 2008.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2010 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Caffentzis, G.C. (2010). Locke, Berkeley and Hume as Philosophers of Money. In: Parigi, S. (eds) George Berkeley: Religion and Science in the Age of Enlightenment. International Archives of the History of Ideas / Archives internationales d'histoire des idées, vol 201. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-9243-4_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-9243-4_5
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-90-481-9242-7
Online ISBN: 978-90-481-9243-4
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawPhilosophy and Religion (R0)