The Adam Smith Problem Revisited: A Methodological Resolution

S. Wagner-Tsukamoto
{"title":"The Adam Smith Problem Revisited: A Methodological Resolution","authors":"S. Wagner-Tsukamoto","doi":"10.1515/jeeh-2012-0013","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The Adam Smith problem refers to a claimed inconsistency between the Theory of Moral Sentiments and the Wealth of Nations, regarding the portrayal of human nature in these two books. Previous research predominantly resolved the claimed inconsistency by uncovering virtuous, less selfish character traits in the Wealth of Nations. This article voices caution. I acknowledge – on methodological grounds – fundamental differences regarding the portrayal of human nature in Smith’s behavioral ethics, i.e. the Theory of Moral Sentiments, as compared with Smith’s economic research. The key argument is that Smith’s two books address different research problems and hence do not, need not and cannot adopt the same view of human nature – for methodological reasons, so my argument. Adam Smith scholarship overlooked that Smith himself in considerable degrees understood “economic man” as a heuristic abstraction. I connect to the philosophies of science of Imre Lakatos and Karl Popper.","PeriodicalId":165087,"journal":{"name":"Journal des ?conomistes et des ?tudes Humaines","volume":"45 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-09-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"11","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal des ?conomistes et des ?tudes Humaines","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/jeeh-2012-0013","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 11

Abstract

Abstract The Adam Smith problem refers to a claimed inconsistency between the Theory of Moral Sentiments and the Wealth of Nations, regarding the portrayal of human nature in these two books. Previous research predominantly resolved the claimed inconsistency by uncovering virtuous, less selfish character traits in the Wealth of Nations. This article voices caution. I acknowledge – on methodological grounds – fundamental differences regarding the portrayal of human nature in Smith’s behavioral ethics, i.e. the Theory of Moral Sentiments, as compared with Smith’s economic research. The key argument is that Smith’s two books address different research problems and hence do not, need not and cannot adopt the same view of human nature – for methodological reasons, so my argument. Adam Smith scholarship overlooked that Smith himself in considerable degrees understood “economic man” as a heuristic abstraction. I connect to the philosophies of science of Imre Lakatos and Karl Popper.
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
重新审视亚当·斯密问题:一个方法论的解决方案
摘要:亚当·斯密问题是指《道德情操论》和《国富论》两本书对人性的描述存在矛盾。先前的研究主要是通过揭示《国富论》中善良、不那么自私的性格特征来解决所谓的不一致。这篇文章提出了警告。我承认——在方法论的基础上——与斯密的经济研究相比,斯密的行为伦理学(即道德情操论)中对人性的描绘存在根本差异。关键的论点是,史密斯的两本书解决了不同的研究问题,因此没有、不需要、也不可能采用相同的人性观点——出于方法论上的原因,我的观点也是如此。亚当·斯密的学术忽略了斯密本人在很大程度上将“经济人”理解为一种启发式的抽象。我与伊姆雷·拉卡托斯和卡尔·波普尔的科学哲学有联系。
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
The Adam Smith Problem Revisited: A Methodological Resolution The Euro as a Proxy for the Classical Gold Standard? Government Debt Financing and Political Commitment in Historical Perspective 3 Comments on “An Austrian Defense of the Euro” In Defense of the Euro: An Austrian Perspective (With a Critique of the Errors of the ECB and the Interventionism of Brussels) The Explanation of the Subprime Crisis According to the Austrian School: A Defense and Illustration
×
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