WHAT CAN ETHICS LEARN FROM ECONOMICS?
Keywords:
justice, transcendentalism, comparitive justice, economis, ethicsAbstract
Against traditional economic theories, Sen’s alternative methodology to address issues of justice helps us not only to argue that economics is not an ethics-free science but also to rethink about our transcendental search for solutions on ethical issues. For a reasonable theory of justice, Sen argues, an identification of a perfect social arrangement is neither sufficient nor necessary. His argument is that identifying ‘perfect’ justice and comparing imperfect social states are analytically disjoined. To identify and address patent injustices in our world, we must prioritise comparative reasoning rather than transcendental reasoning. Comparative approach retains ideals, envisions targets, and engages ranking of different alternatives. Yet, we argue that Sen offers no explicitly systematic exposition of ideal theories.
References
Lionel Robbins, An Essay on the Nature and Significance of Economic Science, 2nd ed., London: Macmillan, 1935, 148-49.
Amartya Sen, On Ethics and Economics, New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1987, 7.
Amartya Sen, “Rational Fools: A Critique of the Behavioural Foundations of Economic Theory,” Philosophy and Public Affairs 6 (1977), 317-44.
For a detailed exposition of this theme, see my article “Authentic Development and Responsibility in Economics,” in Schumacher Reconsidered: Advances in Responsible Economics, ed. Hendrik Opdebeeck, Oxford: Peter Lang, 2012, Chapter 5.
Amartya Sen, The Idea of Justice, London: Penguin Books, 2009.
Amartya Sen, Development as Freedom, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999, 287.
Amartya Sen, “What Do We Want From a Theory of Justice?” Journal of Philosophy 103, 5 (2006), 215-18; “Economics, Law, and Ethics” in Against Injustice: The New Economics of Amartya Sen, eds. Reiko Gotoh and Paul Dumouchel, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009, 39-54; “The Place of Capability in a Theory of Justice” in Measuring Justice: Primary Goods and Capabilities, eds. Harry Brighouse and Ingrid Robeyns, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010, 243-45; “Values and Justice,” Journal of Economic Methodology 19, 2 (2012), 101-108.
Rawls, The Law of Peoples, Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1999, 137; Justice as Fairness: A Restatement, ed., Erin Kelly, Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2001, 132-34.
Sen, “Maximization and the Act of Choice,” Econometrica 65, 4 (1997), 745-79.
A. B. Atkinson, “Public Economics after The Idea of Justice,” Journal of Human Development and Capabilities 13, 4 (2012), 529.
Sen, “Incompleteness and Reasoned Choice,” Synthese 140, 1/2 (2004), 4359; Isaac Levi, “Amartya Sen,” Synthese 140, 1/2 (2004), 61-67.
Sen, Rationality and Freedom, Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2002, 122.
Ingrid Robeyns, “Ideal Theory in Theory and Practice,” Social Theory and Practice 34, 3 (2008), 341-62; “Review Symposium on Amartya Sen’s Idea of Justice: Are Transcendental Theories of Justice Redundant?” Journal of Economic Methodology 19, 2 (2012), 159-63;
Evan Riley, “Against Sen against Rawls on Justice,” Indian Journal of Human Development 5, 1 (2011), 211-21; Chackalackal, “In Defence of Theoretical Ethics,” 369-92.
David Schmidtz, “Nonideal Theory: What It Is and What It Needs to Be,” Ethics 121, 4 (2011), 783.
Zofia Stemplowska, “What’s Ideal about Ideal Theory?” Social Theory and Practice 34, 3 (2008), 324-25.
Sen, “A Reply to Robeyns, Peter and Davis,” Journal of Economic Methodology 19, 2 (2012), 175.
Charles Mills, “Ideal Theory as Ideology,” Hypatia 20, 3 (2005), 165-84.
Robeyns, “Are Transcendental Theories of Justice Redundant?” 160-61, emphasis in original.
Ronald Dworkin, Sovereign Virtue: The Theory and Practice of Equality, Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2000, Part II.
A. John Simmons, “Ideal and Nonideal Theory,” Philosophy and Public Affairs 38, 1 (2010), 34-35.
James Tully, “Political Philosophy as a Critical Activity” in What is Political Theory? eds., Stephen K. White and J. Donald Moon, London: Sage Publications, 2004, 97-98.
John B. Davis, “The Idea of Public Reasoning,” Journal of Economic Methodology 19, 2 (2012), 169-72.
Bernard Williams, In the Beginning Was the Deed: Realism and Moralism in Political Argument, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2005, 61.
Kwame Anthony Appiah, “Sen’s Identities” in Arguments for a Better World: Essays in Honour of Amartya Sen, vol. 1, eds. Kaushik Basu and Ravi Kanpur, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009, 488.
Thomas Nagel makes a strong defense of reason in his The Last Word, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997, 101-12.
