ABSTRACT
Schmoller a theorist?1 It is very common today to see Schmoller as a typical adversary of economic theory. As the Historical School waned, its intellectual legacy was increasingly forgotten in the Federal Republic, and there is an inclination to consider historicism as an ‘anti-theoretical’ movement. This view overlooks the fact that Schmoller did not at all see himself solely as a historian of economics, but also as a theorist. In the preface to his Grundriß, he remarks that he always ‘felt it to be an unjustified criticism that he only strives for description, not for general knowledge of the laws in economic life’ (Schmoller 1904, p. VI). And Spiethoff, his assistant over many years, maintained that Schmoller ‘ultimately was only ever interested in theory’ (Spiethoff 1938, p. 400). We should also note that within the context of the Methodenstreit [Dispute over Methods], Menger and Schmoller never doubted each other’s theoretical intentions. The only point of contention was over the correct method that should inform theoretical analysis. And even in this context, the image of Schmoller that is so firmly anchored in many people’s minds and which sees him as a strict opponent of theoretical deduction stands in need of being corrected. Schmoller, at least, would not have considered himself an opponent of the deductive method. Rather, he was of the opinion that deduction and induction form part of scientific thinking, and that they are as indispensable ‘as the right and left foot for walking’ (Schmoller 1898a, p. 293).
