Abstract:

19. The methods that occurred at the end of the century resulted in war separated sociology and economics sciences. In the early 20th century, when the Neoclassic economy began to rise, there was an Old School of Corporate Economics in America. Among the most important members of the American Old School of Corporate Economics are Thortein Veblen, Wesley Mitchell, John R. Commons and John K. Galbraith, former corporate economists who have tried to develop a different theory of economics than the Neoclassical Economics Theory. Therefore, they benefit from social sciences such as psychology, history, sociology. However, the Old School of Corporate Economics methods were defeated by the Neoclassic School in the battle. The methods the Neoclassic School of Economics, who won the War, has taken over the control of the economics science. The study indicates that there is a single economic science (Classic and Neoclassic Schools), but each country has different cultural and historical conditions. Culture, institutions, ethics and history are important variables and influence the way the economies follow. It is necessary to include social elements that are ignored in economic research. In this context, we see that there are different models of capitalism in the global economy. In the global economy, there are corporate, cultural, ethical and historical variations between countries. This study describes the critical approach to the Neoclassic School of Economics, which represents the do-gush of modern economics and the main stream of the American Old School of Corporate Economics. In the last part of the study, the influence of global political paradigms on the Turkish economy, and the findings of Sabri Ülgener, the first Weberyan economist of Turkey in terms of its relationship with the subject, are referred to in the context of the religious-economic relationship.

Keywords:

Abstract:

With the  “war of methods” which took place at the end of the 19th century, sociology and economics were separated. At the beginning of the 20th century, when Neoclassical School began to rise, the Old Institutional School in America was confronting Neoclassical School. Among the most important members of the Old American Institutional School were Thortein Veblen, Wesley Mitchell, John R. Com-mons and John K. Galbraith. Old Institutional economists tried to develop a different economic theory from Neoclassical economic theory. In order to build a new econo-mic theory, they used various branches of social sciences such as psychology, history and sociology. However, the Old Institutional School  was defeated by the Neoclassi-cal School with the war of methods. Having won the war of methods, the Neoclassi-cal School took the control of economics science. In this study, it is concluded that there is only one economics composed of Classical and Neoclassical Schools. However each country has diverse cultural and historical conditions. Culture, reli-gion, ethics, history and institutions are important variables and they influence the path of capitalism. Therefore, in the global economy various models of capitalism exist. In the global economy there are institutional, cultural, ethical and historical variations among countries. Those omitted infuential social variables should be ad-ded to the economic researches. At this study, the birth of modern economics and the criticims of Old Institutional School to mainstream economis is briefly explained. Besides at the last part, the infuences of global policy paradigms on Turkish economy and, the distinguished Weberian economist Sabri Ülgener’s remarks about religion-economy nexus is explained simultaneously.

Keywords: