Hirschman actually noted that at first, the desire for personal economic wealth, including the pursuit of self interest and individual material gain, was actually treated as a very serious sin, especially in the Christian-oriented medieval society. In this case, Hirschman actually tries to solve the quizzical puzzle why at the onset of the development of capitalism, the values of self interest and the pursuit of individual material gain, have been accepted as the norm in society. According to Hirschman, the answer behind this fact is actually mainly political reasons.
The work of Hirschman traced his change from the post-Renaissance question, the nature of man, with particular interest on mans destructive nature. According to Hirschman, moral and religious explanations have failed to serve as an effective guide to limit such destructive natures of men, and that there where three main solutions to this problem that have arisen. Hirschman noted the first solution, which is the sovereign of Hobbes. According to Hirschman, Hobbes argued for a social contract, wherein people would both agree to a sovereign which has power over society to enforce social order and avoid chaos. The second solution, Hirschman noted, was the medium of civilization, which was actually expounded by the works of Vico. Hirschman noted that Vico actually argued for social institutions, such as the state, to be mediums of civilization, wherein men will actually learn and adopt how to behave and act in a civilized manner, which was essential in maintaining social order and harmony in society.
The last solution to this problem was the thesis of countervailing passions. This thesis was noted by Hirschman in the works of Hume, Spinoza, and even Bacon, in which the love of gain, a value that is before seen as sinful, can in fact serve as a very important way in countervailing the destructive passions that men are consisted of. In this case, then, Hirschman actually argues that capitalism, with its values of self gain, the prioritization of self interest, and the seek for individual material benefits was an important measure in countervailing the destructive nature of men, and in this case acts as an important part in maintaining social order. Hirschman in this case also noted the idea of Adam Smith, wherein the laissez faire economy, which consists of people pursuing their own self interest, will naturally lead into social harmony and social order, with the free market acting as a self regulating mechanism. In this case Hirschman noted that capitalism is key in ensuring stability and social order and harmony in a society. According to Hirschman, the idea of Smith actually showed that it undercut(s) the idea that passion can be pitted against passioninterests against passion.
In addition, Hirschman also argues that the political consequences of the development of capitalism have in fact proven that it leads to social order and social stability. Hirschman also noted in this case the Smithian categorization of doux commerce, in which the association of men to commerce, in their individual pursuit of self interest, highlights the development of human reducing their passions, including their destructive passions, to self interest, making them contribute significantly to social order. Hirschman concluded that this part of intellectual history, (Hirschman 69) must be properly put into light, so that the dominant violent and greedy economic origins of capitalism might be seen in new ways, and that the political arguments for capitalism might also be put into proper attention and significance. He said that this will be vital in making us know this non-articulated basic theory of capitalism.
I think that this is an excellent work for capitalism, especially due to the fact that the political argument highlighted in the book was surely needed to be put into the light for discussions regarding the development of capitalism. I appreciate the way that Hirschman actually attempted to look at the philosophical roots of the political motivations regarding the case for capitalism, as well as the need for social order which was contextualized in the often socially unstable period of the medieval ages. In addition, I also think that the attempt by Hirschman to bring the debate regarding the developments of capitalism was successful, for it gave a new light on how to interpret the social upheavals that where evident in the development of capitalism not just as an economic system, but a social system. Finally, I think that this work will surely bring more insights aside from the ones presented by Marx and Weber in their discussion of capitalism.