![]() Thus, this article offers an account of the variance in readings of the invisible hand and contributes toward the contemporary revisionist Smithian literature that explores, criticizes, and revises dominant readings of Smith. invisible hand to promote an end which was no part of his intention. ![]() The exploration of these readings and the manner in which they are epistemologically conditioned are embedded within the wider discussion around an interpretation put forward by Quentin Skinner. One of Adam Smiths foremost contributions to economic science is his compelling. These distinct readings from two North American economists with remarkably similar historical, geographical, and academic contexts provide the ideal case for exploring the manner in which readers' differing epistemological commitments shape their different readings of historical concepts and texts. To do so, the author examines two divergent readings of Adam Smith: Jacob Viner's reading of Smith's invisible hand as God and Paul Samuelson's reading of the same three words as an allocative mechanism that translates an individual's “selfish” actions into the public good or “the best good of all” within a state of perfect competition. This article argues that to adequately evaluate such readings one must understand the inalienable role that a scholar's epistemological framework plays in the conditioning of their reading of historical texts and concepts. As historians of economic thought, we are faced with the task of evaluating the readings put forward by these scholars. However, Smith’s ideas remain influential in economics and politics.Within the discipline of economics, as within all academic disciplines, scholars produce texts in which they examine, discuss, and sometimes invoke their intellectual predecessors. Others argue that his ideas have been used to justify inequality and exploitation. Some people argue that his ideas are too simplistic and that they do not take into account the complexity of the real world. This benefits consumers.Īdam Smith’s ideas have been controversial since they were first published. When businesses compete, they are forced to innovate and produce better products at lower prices. Smith argued that competition is essential for economic growth. ![]() When countries specialize in producing goods and services that they can produce at a lower cost, they can exchange these goods and services with other countries, and everyone benefits. Smith argued that free trade is beneficial for all countries involved. When individuals pursue their own self-interest, they are also promoting the general welfare. Smith argued that the market economy is self-regulating. When workers specialize in a particular task, they become more efficient and produce more output. Smith argued that the division of labor is essential for economic growth. He is also considered one of the founders of modern sociology. His work was instrumental in the rise of capitalism and the Industrial Revolution. Smith’s ideas had a profound impact on the development of economics and politics. He also argued that the best way to promote economic growth is through free trade and competition. In 1776, he published “The Wealth of Nations”, which argued that the wealth of a nation is not determined by its gold or silver reserves, but by its productivity. ![]() After graduating, he worked as a tutor and then as a lecturer in moral philosophy at the University of Glasgow. Smith was born in Kirkcaldy, Scotland, and studied at the University of Glasgow and the University of Oxford. He is best known for his book “The Wealth of Nations”, which is considered the first modern work of economics. Occupation: Moral Philosopher and Political EconomistĪdam Smith is considered one of the most influential thinkers of the Age of Enlightenment. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |