The concept of human nature builds the basis for thinking about economics and its fundamental elements such as methodology, methods and crucial theories. Therefore, changes in the concept of human nature lead to changes in the fundamentals of economics. The goal of the paper is to present this impact using the example of evolutionary and neoclassical economics. The method applied to this research is, among others, a content analysis of the selected texts developed within neoclassical and evolutionary economics and the research undertaken about them. The analysis proves that the main differences between these economic schools might be explained by the diverse assumptions about human nature.

No abstract

Abstract. e economics depends on the concept of human nature very strongly. e concepts of human nature can be understood as a set of assumptions made about the individual (on di erent levels: behaviour, motives, meaning) and his interactions with other people, with groups and diverse institutions. It corresponds with the image of world people have. e models of human nature build foundations of economics and impact on the eld of the economics. erefore if those images of men change, the way of thinking about economics and their elements adjust to those changes as well. e goal of the pape r is to present the impact of these alterations of image of man on the economics. is impact will be illustrated on the example of the evolutionary economics, which is contrasted with the orthodox concept of human nature persisting in the neoclassical economics -homo economicus. e method applied to this research is, among others, a content analysis of the most important texts developed within neoclassical and evolutionary economics. To reach this goal the de nition of the concept of human nature will be introduced, accompanied by the main dimensions and levels of this concept. en the variations of the concept of human nature at those levels and dimension will be compared between neoclassical and evolutionary economics. Di erences in understanding of the eld between those two schools will be explained as resulting from the diverse concepts of human nature. e analysis proved that the main di erences in those economic schools might be explained by the changed assumptions about the human nature and the image of the world.

Contemporary research exploring the Fair Trade movement does not provide a clear answer whether the overall impact of Fair Trade is positive or negative and what are the real motives of Fair Trade consumers. In the paper we investigate whether the assumptions of selected heterodox schools (feminist, ecological and humanist) fit better to the reality of the Fair Trade movement than those of the neoclassical theory. Although ‘better fitness’ does not necessarily mean ‘better explanation’, the mismatch with reality may constitute an obstacle in identifying a crucial aspect of the researched phenomenon (i.e. Fair Trade), harming explanation of its existence and development.

This paper focuses on extracting main features of the concept of human nature in feminist economics and comparing it to the homo oeconomicus basing on some crucial works developed within those disciplines. Therefore the method applied to this research is mainly a content analysis of representative of those economic schools. In order to evaluate main differences between the anthropological assumptions of those economic schools, the tool to this comparison is developed. This tool is effect of research on the meaning, role, functions, and main elements of concepts of human nature. It allows for differentiate within the concept of human nature main levels and dimensions, and look for them while conducting a content analysis of representative writings.