ICBS seminar with Jan Greitens: What si money for? Comparing six centuries of monetary thought /9.11. 2026/
People have always theorized what money is for. But how can we compare all these theories across six centuries? prof Jan Greitens (Johann Wolfgang Goethe-Universität, Frankfurt, Germany) will discuss his approach to comparing monetary theories and the resulting taxonomy. As whole the seminar promises to address broad issues about transferability of theories between contexts – which might be an inspiration also for people doing comparative research or other theory-driven endeavor.
WHEN: Monday, November 9th, 2026, 10:30-12:00
WHERE: RB436
DISCLAIMER: The research seminar will be on-site only. Thanks for your understanding.
What is money for? Comparing six centuries of monetary thought
Over six centuries, thinkers have tried to explain what money is, where its value comes from, and how credit is created, and they did so under very different historical conditions and monetary systems. Can such theories be meaningfully compared? This presentation argues that they can, and that comparison is worthwhile. Setting theories from different eras side by side shows that some questions keep returning, reveals lines of thought that cut across historical periods and schools of economics, and brings out the normative assumptions that each tradition often leaves unstated.
The main difficulty is balancing two demands: identifying ideas that recur over time, and respecting the specific contexts in which each theory emerged. Methodologically, the taxonomy draws on the history of ideas. It takes from Arthur Lovejoy the search for recurring “unit ideas,” from Michel Foucault an attention to the historically specific epistemes in which knowledge takes shape, and from David Armitage the concept of “serial contextualism,” which reconciles the two by comparing ideas across time while keeping each anchored in its context. The taxonomy is organized around one starting question: which of money’s four functions (store of value, medium of exchange, means of payment, or unit of account) a theory treats as most important. It has drawn polarized reactions, since any classification simplifies and historical theories rarely fit neatly into categories. It is therefore offered not as a definitive classification but as a starting point for dialogue between monetary traditions.
Prof. Greitens has recently published a book on the topic with Springer Nature.
Seminar Series: Interpretive and Critical Business Studies (ICBS)
A series of seminars with a primarily qualitative focus, featuring both domestic and international researchers presenting their current research topics.
Thanks to Lucie Mařanová and Tanweer Ali for organizing this session!
