Aristotle's Geometrical Accounting

G. M. Ambrosi
{"title":"Aristotle's Geometrical Accounting","authors":"G. M. Ambrosi","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2419927","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Aristotle’s analysis of economic exchange in the Nicomachean Ethics involves two paradigms which he addresses separately but then he stresses that there is no difference between them: barter and monetary exchange. Each one of them is rendered here separately but in a mutually consistent way by using geometrical methods which were well established and widely used in Aristotle’s intellectual surroundings. In this framework Aristotle’s ‘monetary equivalence’ in exchange appears as an application of Euclid’s proposition Elements I,43 about the equality of geometrical complements in a rectangle. Aristotle repeatedly refers to ‘own production’ when mentioning exchange between two artisans, say, ‘builder’ and ‘farmer’. The accounting worth of the quantity of ‘own production’ in terms of money is then Aristotle’s “worth” of an artisan. This interpretation helps to make sense of Aristotle’s statements of the type: ‘as builder to farmer, so food to houses’. We show that this statement is logical and plausible provided that the goods in question are measured as proportions of sales out of own production. This result solves one of the major riddles of Aristotle’s text on exchange. Accounting of exchange should be seen in connection with Aristotle’s critique of the Pythagoreans’ concept of justice. He claims that they wrongly equate justice with ‘reciprocation’. The paper does not speculate about Aristotle’s alternatives. It just shows that his text on ‘reciprocation’ can be interpreted with reference to a consistent and interesting system of geometrical accounting. This might not be his own invention, but Aristotle’s writings are the sole literary source for systematic geometrical accounting of economic exchange. This definitely merits listing Aristotle’s passages on exchange as being among the most interesting texts of ancient economic analysis.","PeriodicalId":123337,"journal":{"name":"History of Accounting eJournal","volume":"39 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"History of Accounting eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2419927","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Aristotle’s analysis of economic exchange in the Nicomachean Ethics involves two paradigms which he addresses separately but then he stresses that there is no difference between them: barter and monetary exchange. Each one of them is rendered here separately but in a mutually consistent way by using geometrical methods which were well established and widely used in Aristotle’s intellectual surroundings. In this framework Aristotle’s ‘monetary equivalence’ in exchange appears as an application of Euclid’s proposition Elements I,43 about the equality of geometrical complements in a rectangle. Aristotle repeatedly refers to ‘own production’ when mentioning exchange between two artisans, say, ‘builder’ and ‘farmer’. The accounting worth of the quantity of ‘own production’ in terms of money is then Aristotle’s “worth” of an artisan. This interpretation helps to make sense of Aristotle’s statements of the type: ‘as builder to farmer, so food to houses’. We show that this statement is logical and plausible provided that the goods in question are measured as proportions of sales out of own production. This result solves one of the major riddles of Aristotle’s text on exchange. Accounting of exchange should be seen in connection with Aristotle’s critique of the Pythagoreans’ concept of justice. He claims that they wrongly equate justice with ‘reciprocation’. The paper does not speculate about Aristotle’s alternatives. It just shows that his text on ‘reciprocation’ can be interpreted with reference to a consistent and interesting system of geometrical accounting. This might not be his own invention, but Aristotle’s writings are the sole literary source for systematic geometrical accounting of economic exchange. This definitely merits listing Aristotle’s passages on exchange as being among the most interesting texts of ancient economic analysis.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
亚里士多德的几何会计
亚里士多德在《尼各马可伦理学》中对经济交换的分析涉及两种范式,他分别阐述了这两种范式,但他强调它们之间没有区别:物物交换和货币交换。它们每一个都是分开的,但以一种相互一致的方式,用的是几何学的方法,这种方法在亚里士多德的思想环境中被广泛使用。在这个框架中,亚里士多德在交换中的“货币等价”表现为欧几里得关于矩形几何补相等的命题的应用。当提到两个工匠之间的交换时,亚里士多德反复提到“自己生产”,比如“建造者”和“农民”。用金钱来计算“自己生产”的数量的价值,就是亚里士多德所说的工匠的“价值”。这种解释有助于理解亚里士多德的“建筑之于农民,食物之于房屋”这一类型的陈述。我们证明,这种说法是合乎逻辑的和合理的,只要所讨论的货物是按自己生产的销售比例来衡量的。这个结果解决了亚里士多德关于交换的文章中的一个主要谜题。交换的记帐应当与亚里士多德对毕达哥拉斯的正义概念的批判联系起来看。他声称他们错误地将正义等同于“回报”。这篇论文没有推测亚里士多德的替代方案。这只是表明,他关于“往复”的文章可以用一个一致而有趣的几何计算系统来解释。这可能不是他自己的发明,但亚里士多德的著作是对经济交换进行系统几何计算的唯一文学来源。这绝对值得把亚里士多德关于交换的段落列为古代经济分析中最有趣的文本之一。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Evolution of U.S. Regulation and the Standard-Setting Process for Financial Reporting: 1930s to the Present Learning to Disclose: Disclosure Dynamics in the 1890s Streetcar Industry Financial Reporting by Charities: Why Do Some Choose to Report Under a More Extensive Reporting Framework? What Makes Research Possible? The Management Studies Research Division at the London School of Economics How America was Tricked on Tax Policy: Secrets and Undisclosed Practices - Book Review.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1