Economic theory has neglected homo speculans while fixating on homo economicus.

Evidence

How did students of capitalism understand the historical transformations discussed so far? Capitalism studies have sought to challenge the view of finance capitalism as a sequential transition from a material economy of productive investment and “real value creation” to an abstract and unproductive economy of fictitious values. As we saw in chapter 1, however, critical debates of finance (both historically and at the current juncture) continue to focus overwhelmingly on deconstructing the rational, utility-maximizing homo economicus rather than on understanding its successor. Capitalist theorizing has striven without success to reconcile the vexing contradictions of homo speculans, whose decisive nineteenth-century ascendancy blurred boundaries between irrational gambling, fictitious trading, rational investing, and even political speculation (the patriotic duty of hedging a nation’s uncertain futures). As a result, the speculative imagination has remained mystified in major studies, in spite of its important role. — Aris Komporozos-Athanasiou, Speculative Communities, 136

Categorization

• DEFINE: Introduces homo speculans as the successor figure to homo economicus whose 19th-century ascendancy blurred gambling, investing, and political hedging.
• XREF: connects to: Critique of financialization must center the imagination because mainstream capitalist theory neglects it. — Aris Komporozos-Athanasiou, Speculative Communities: Living with…, 73