Josef Schumpeter, “Literaturberichte” (1913) — Summary

Schumpeter’s “Literaturberichte” is not a single treatise but a sequence of compact reviews whose cumulative thesis is programmatic: economics must recover rigorous theory without losing contact with facts, institutions, and history. He judges each book by whether it advances real scientific problems rather than merely supplying ideology, scholastic method-talk, or descriptive material. The opening review of Lifschitz’s methodological work sets the tone. Schumpeter does not reject methodology, but he treats it as secondary to concrete inquiry:

Eher sind Erörterungen darüber ein Zeichen von Unfruchtbarkeit bezüglich konkreter Leistungen.

English translation: Discussions about it are rather a sign of barrenness with respect to concrete achievements.

This suspicion governs the whole report. Historical research is useful, and Schumpeter explicitly concedes that “jeder Historiker Theorie treiben muß”; yet facts alone are not enough unless they are analytically worked through. Conversely, theory must not become political justificatorys. His praise of Gide rests on “ruhige Objektivität,” clarity, and the ability to keep practical questions “in ihren Schranken.” His criticism of Ruhland, by contrast, attacks a moralized and uncritical social diagnosis in which “Kapital” becomes little more than greed.

The reviews move from textbooks and systems to value theory, money, interest, capital, applied political economy, and banking. Within this structure Schumpeter’s central conceptual moves become clear. First, he separates science from party allegiance. In reviewing Lifschitz’s critique of Böhm-Bawerk and the “Grenznutzler,” he rejects the claim that marginal utility theory is inherently capitalist. What matters is not ideological origin but explanatory power:

die Theorie als solche außerhalb jedes Parteiverbandes steht

English translation: theory as such stands outside any party affiliation

He reinforces this with a pragmatic criterion of scientific fertility:

An ihren Früchten muß man jede Theorie erkennen.

English translation: Every theory must be known by its fruits.

Second, Schumpeter narrows the psychological basis of marginal utility theory. It need not rest on a full causal psychology; it requires only a workable parallelism between valuations and economic actions. Thus social and historical formation of wants may be true, but it is not the central issue for abstract price theory. The theoretical object is the relation between given wants, choices, and market outcomes.

The review of Adolf Weber gives the most explicit statement of Schumpeter’s disciplinary position. He welcomes the German reaction against excessive practical politics and the historical school, but warns that declaring allegiance to theory is not itself theoretical work:

Es gilt Probleme zu lösen, nicht Methoden zu diskutieren.

English translation: The task is to solve problems, not to discuss methods.

His position is not anti-historical. It is a plea for balance and continuity:

Wo man neue Wege gehen kann, ohne die alten verfallen zu lassen, soll man es tun.

English translation: Where one can pursue new paths without letting the old ones fall into disrepair, one ought to do so.

The long discussions of Fisher and Davenport show Schumpeter engaging theory at its highest level. Fisher’s Rate of Interest is praised for connecting abstract reasoning with statistics and actuarial practice, making theory visible as a matter of lived economic reality:

Fragen des Lebens von Fleisch und Blut

English translation: questions of life in flesh and blood

Yet Schumpeter doubts that “Time-Preference” alone solves the interest problem. Time matters, but the explanation of interest must lie not merely in temporal distance but in economic change, productivity, and the expanding stream of future goods:

was in dieser Zeit geschieht

English translation: what is happening in our time

Davenport receives perhaps the warmest theoretical appreciation. Schumpeter admires a book devoted to pure economic reasoning, free of methodological display and practical ornament:

nur Arbeit an den grundlegenden Theoremen der reinen Ökonomie

English translation: only work upon the fundamental theorems of pure economics

He values Davenport’s attack on the traditional triad of production factors, his limits on marginal productivity theory, and especially his capital analysis around the “loan-fund” as “unspecialised purchasing power.” What Schumpeter prizes is not premature closure but disciplined recognition of difficulty.

The applied reviews make the same demand in another register. Schachner’s Australia book is valuable as information, but Schumpeter faults it for insufficient causal penetration and political partiality, lacking

volle kritische Besonnenheit und Objektivität.

English translation: full critical composure and objectivity.

Conant’s banking history is praised because its facts are organized under trained scientific viewpoints. The file closes by shifting to financial-science literature under Paul Grünwald, reinforcing the broader bibliographical purpose.

The relevance of the report lies in its snapshot of economics at a moment of transition: marginalism, capital theory, money, interest, social policy, and historical economics are all being renegotiated. Schumpeter’s governing standard is already mature: economics should be theoretically exact, empirically responsible, and politically unenslaved.