{"title":"契约主义经济学家该怎么做?","authors":"T. Kwarciński, Krzysztof M. Turek","doi":"10.1177/00483931231173351","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The paper examines Robert Sugden’s arguments for contractarian economics, which exclude objective valuation. From a metaethical stance we claim that it is possible and desirable to enrich the axiology of contractarian economics to make it more convincing and applicable. Analyzing Sugden’s argument against paternalism, we show that adopting a richer axiology is compatible with the contractarian framework. Examining Sugden’s claim for redistribution, we demonstrate that explaining the psychological stability of a market economy is problematic without a richer axiology. Considering sweatshop problem, we argue that without a richer axiology, contractarian economists are unable to recognize mutually advantageous exploitation. The paper concludes with the postulates on contractarian economics.","PeriodicalId":46776,"journal":{"name":"Philosophy of the Social Sciences","volume":"53 1","pages":"396 - 415"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"What Should Contractarian Economists Do?\",\"authors\":\"T. Kwarciński, Krzysztof M. Turek\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/00483931231173351\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The paper examines Robert Sugden’s arguments for contractarian economics, which exclude objective valuation. From a metaethical stance we claim that it is possible and desirable to enrich the axiology of contractarian economics to make it more convincing and applicable. Analyzing Sugden’s argument against paternalism, we show that adopting a richer axiology is compatible with the contractarian framework. Examining Sugden’s claim for redistribution, we demonstrate that explaining the psychological stability of a market economy is problematic without a richer axiology. Considering sweatshop problem, we argue that without a richer axiology, contractarian economists are unable to recognize mutually advantageous exploitation. The paper concludes with the postulates on contractarian economics.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46776,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Philosophy of the Social Sciences\",\"volume\":\"53 1\",\"pages\":\"396 - 415\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Philosophy of the Social Sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/00483931231173351\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ETHICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Philosophy of the Social Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00483931231173351","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
The paper examines Robert Sugden’s arguments for contractarian economics, which exclude objective valuation. From a metaethical stance we claim that it is possible and desirable to enrich the axiology of contractarian economics to make it more convincing and applicable. Analyzing Sugden’s argument against paternalism, we show that adopting a richer axiology is compatible with the contractarian framework. Examining Sugden’s claim for redistribution, we demonstrate that explaining the psychological stability of a market economy is problematic without a richer axiology. Considering sweatshop problem, we argue that without a richer axiology, contractarian economists are unable to recognize mutually advantageous exploitation. The paper concludes with the postulates on contractarian economics.
期刊介绍：
For more than four decades Philosophy of the Social Sciences has served as the international, interdisciplinary forum for current research, theory and debate on the philosophical foundations of the social services. Philosophy of the Social Sciences focuses on the central issues of the social sciences, including general methodology (explaining, theorizing, testing) the application of philosophy (especially individualism versus holism), the nature of rationality and the history of theories and concepts. Among the topics you''ll explore are: ethnomethodology, evolution, Marxism, phenomenology, postmodernism, rationality, relativism, scientific methods, and textual interpretations. Philosophy of the Social Sciences'' open editorial policy ensures that you''ll enjoy rigorous scholarship on topics viewed from many different-- and often conflicting-- schools of thought. No school, party or style of philosophy of the social sciences is favoured. Debate between schools is encouraged. Each issue presents submissions by distinguished scholars from a variety of fields, including: anthropology, communications, economics, history, linguistics, philosophy, psychology, and sociology. Each issue brings you in-depth discussions, symposia, literature surveys, translations, and review symposia of interest both to philosophyers concerned with the social sciences and to social scientists concerned with the philosophical foundations of their subjects.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
