Philosophy Dictionary of ArgumentsHome
| |||
|
| |||
| Egoism: Egoism is the attitude that one's self is, or should be, the motivation and the goal of one's own action. It is the view that one should always act in one's own best interest, regardless of the impact on others._____________Annotation: The above characterizations of concepts are neither definitions nor exhausting presentations of problems related to them. Instead, they are intended to give a short introduction to the contributions below. – Lexicon of Arguments. | |||
| Author | Concept | Summary/Quotes | Sources |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Adam Smith on Egoism - Dictionary of Arguments
Otteson I 43 Egoism/Adam Smith/Otteson: "It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker, that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest. We address ourselves, not to their humanity but to their self-love, and never talk to them of our own necessities but of their advantages" (WN(1): 27). Note the phrases "their own interest," "self-love," and "their advantages." Otteson: What do you hear when you read that passage? Do you hear selfishness? That is what Karl Marx (1818-1883), author of the 1848 Communist Manifesto(2), thought when he read Smith - and he did read Smith. MarxVsSmith, Adam: Here, Marx thought, not even twenty pages into the Wealth of Nations, was the smoking gun: Adam Smith, the father of economics, admitting - even celebrating - the fact that Smithian political economy is founded on selfishness. Marx would go on to argue that this system of political economy, which Marx called "capitalism," is built on recommending to people that they should be selfish and should consider other people as mere means to their own ends, as mere tools to be manipulated rather than moral agents with dignity to be respected. Whatever its material virtues might be, capitalism, Marx thought, was thus founded upon an immoral base, and thus its gains were ill-gotten. Otteson: Was Smith arguing that we should all be selfish in our dealings Sith one another? Certainly not in our moral dealings with one another: remember that in his Theory of Moral Sentiments(3) Smith argued that we all desire mutual sympathy of sentiments, which drives us to into mutually supportive relationships with others. But in our economic dealings with one another? Is Smith telling us we should be selfish in the market - as it were, to check our morality at the marketplace door? Smith did not believe so. What he saw in these dealings with the butcher, the brewer, and the baker was not a narrow, let alone odious, selfishness, but something rather different: respect. >Recognition. Otteson I 44 Because of our peculiar liabilities, human beings need the help of others; and it is by making mutually advantageous offers "that we obtain from one another the far greater part of those good offices which we stand in need of" (WN(1): 26). Now the assumption Smith makes in this argument is indeed that we are driven by self- interest. Because, however, of the twin constraints of (1) our desire for mutual sympathy of sentiments and (2) living in a "well-governed society," we are driven - both by our own desires and by our public institutions - to meet one another as peers, as moral equals, and to make offers to one another that either of us is free to decline. Each of us has an "opt-out option" that is protected by our society's commitment to Smithian justice, and this disciplines us from any notion we might otherwise have had about merely trying to steal from or defraud one another. >Sympathy/Adam Smith, >Community/Adam Smith, >Division of Labour/Adam Smith, >Equality/Adam Smith, >Inequalities/Adam Smith. And because each of us desires mutual sympathy of sentiments, we desire to conduct ourselves in ways that others will approve of. So when we seek our meat from butchers, our ale from brewers, and our bread from bakers, we make them offers that recognize that they are our equals, that they have interests and obligations of their own, and that our interests and obligations do not trump theirs. Recognition: For Smith, then, the act of making a person an offer is a recognition of the inherent value of others; it reflects the equal dignity that each of us has, and it is a shining example of proper moral relations among people. The mutually voluntary and thus mutually beneficial transaction that is the cornerstone of a Smithian market economy is, then, not only the key to increasing general prosperity, but it is also the instantiation of truly moral human relations. >Marx/Adam Smith. 1. Smith, Adam. (1776) The Wealth of Nations. London: W. Strahan and T. Cadell. 2. Marx, Karl, and Friedrich Engels (1994) [1848]. The Communist Manifesto. In Lawrence H. Simon (ed.), Karl Marx, Selected Writings. Hackett. 3. Smith, Adam (1982) [1759]. The Theory of Moral Sentiments. D. D. Raphael and A. L. Macfie, eds. Liberty Fund._____________Explanation of symbols: Roman numerals indicate the source, arabic numerals indicate the page number. The corresponding books are indicated on the right hand side. ((s)…): Comment by the sender of the contribution. Translations: Dictionary of Arguments The note [Concept/Author], [Author1]Vs[Author2] or [Author]Vs[term] resp. "problem:"/"solution:", "old:"/"new:" and "thesis:" is an addition from the Dictionary of Arguments. If a German edition is specified, the page numbers refer to this edition. |
EconSmith I Adam Smith The Theory of Moral Sentiments London 2010 EconSmithV I Vernon L. Smith Rationality in Economics: Constructivist and Ecological Forms Cambridge 2009 Otteson I James R. Otteson The Essential Adam Smith Vancouver: Fraser Institute. 2018 |
||
