In Defense of Deontology and Kant: A Reply to van Staveren

In this note, I respond to a recent article by Irene van Staveren (2007) in this journal, where she presents a case for virtue ethics, rather than deontology or consequentialism, as the most appropriate philosophical foundation for economics. Rather than taking issue with her positive arguments for virtue ethics, I argue in defense of deontology – or, more specifically, the moral philosophy of Immanuel Kant. I argue that, when properly understood, Kantian ethics should not be associated solely with formal rules and obligation, but that Kant's moral system can accommodate many of the concerns of virtue ethics, such as social relations, real-world context, and human fallibility, as well as embodying a unique emphasis on human dignity and judgment.     

The economist’s oath: a review Essay

George DeMartino’s 2011 monograph, The Economist’s Oath: On the Need for and Content of Professional Economic Ethics, provides an excellent basis for the development of a discourse on the ethics of economists. This review focuses on the way in which mainstream economists’ arguments against consideration of ethics follow from their presentation of economics as a purely technical subject, and the implication that this pretense itself is unethical. The complexity of ethical issues within a pluralist approach to economics is explored, ranging from the institutional environment within which economists practice to epistemological questions.     

A Response to Mark D. White

In this response to Mark D. White, I agree with White's clear distinction between Kant and deontology but reject the suggestion that I would have implied that virtue ethics is a more appropriate ethical foundation for economics than both utilitarianism and deontology. Moreover, I argue against any attempt at creating a hierarchy in ethical foundations for economics, including one that would put deontology first or a view, apparently entertained by White, which would (almost) equate virtue with moral duty, thereby reducing virtue ethics to deontology.     

Beyond Utilitarianism and Deontology: Ethics in Economics

Abstract

This article starts from a methodological position that fact and value are mutually related, both in the real world and in economic analysis. It then discusses deontological ethics. This approach is concerned with equality and dignity, as expressed in right and norms, and how these rights and norms constrain individual choices. Deontology is thus different from the utility maximisation of utilitarian ethics, where ethics appears in utility functions as moral preferences. The paper then argues that, although deontology does better than utilitarianism in analysing ethics in economics, it has its own weaknesses. These weaknesses require another theory of ethics for economics, virtue ethics, which emphasises the interrelatedness of agents and commitment to shared values beyond the rules that a society has institutionalised. Virtue ethics internalises morality not as a preference or a constraint, but through the practices in which agents are related in their pursuit of value added.     

The Role of Ethics in Economics and Management: Galbraith–Drucker approaches

Ethics has been linked to virtue, considering it within an individual sphere. It has also been related to good social behaviour or even religious factors, and so on. In general, economic thinkers have not questioned some of the basic principles which help to shape the fundamental ethical criteria in economic behaviour. The pursuit of individual interest has been identified as pecuniary profit maximization and, in this sense, Peter Drucker states that this has been the fundamental motivation of any economic agent, even before capitalism was born and Galbraith pointed out that the lack of consideration of other motivations, apart from earning money, has been one of the biggest mistakes in economics. The main goal of this paper is to analyse the Drucker and Galbraith approaches on ethics.      

The nature and implications of a process conception of rationality based on social learning

Even while acknowledging the autonomy of “laws” specific to economics, theology situates the view of economics as a “means-ends” science of human choices within an unavoidable overarching moral order. After all, economic life is merely part of a much larger personal quest for happiness. Thus, the efficient selection of means for particular ends necessarily takes place within the context of objective standards of economic rights and obligations as part of human nature. The teleological perspectives of theology add much to our understanding of economic life by providing the warrants for these rights and obligations.     

Confucian economics: how is Chinese thinking different?

The Chinese have their economics. Not yet acknowledged, it is contained in the Confucian thought. Called by me ‘Confucian economics’, it sharply differs from the Western ‘Liberal economics’. Individuals seek posterity through offspring, rather than ‘instant gratification’. Resources are not seen as scarce but as abundant. Rather than take resources from others, people work to make a living. The work ethics and not the profit margin is a key motive. Individuals work not for themselves but for their family. The family is a source of moral sentiment, understood as responsibility for others. This is why the main institution is family and not market. To Confucians, the key principle is equality, which precedes efficiency. Inequality upsets ‘social peace’, as a precondition for growth. Built on Liberal principles, the Western capitalist system is a market one. The Chinese system, which I call ‘Confucian system’, is also market-based. The former is a ‘free market’ animated by individuals, the latter is a ‘familial market’ built around households. Both approaches advocate ‘minimal state’, but for Liberals the state is a ‘night watchman’ to ensure the security of resources, while for Confucians, the state is a moral guide to enable social harmony. As a theory, Confucian economics is a form of ethics and the Liberal is not. China has never abandoned Confucianism. The recent reforms are not about rolling back the Soviet model to establish a capitalist system. Relying on Confucian economics, China is reviving Confucian system. Paradoxically, the ancient Confucian economics has become the engine of China’s modernity. This is a key reason for China’s ‘longest boom’. To extend it, China needs to refocus its policies from ‘capital formation’ to the ‘moral cultivation’, along the Confucian principles.     

The Health Services Industry: Realism in Social Control

The aim of the paper is to investigate the relationship between institutions and development ethics. In a value context, the center of the discussion between institutions and development ethics is based on confronting ethics as "means of the means," which implies that ethics is not only concerned with the ends of human action but also enters into the value dynamisms of the instruments utilized by development agents in achieving these ends: the means. A common acceptable definition of development ethics is the ethical reflection of the ends and means for any purposeful social-economic activity toward development. Institutions are the social cement that condition and enhance the roles agents play in economic life. We argue that development ethics and institutions are entwined: development ethics influence institutions and institutions influence development ethics.     

Homo Economicus,AIs, humans and rats: decision-making and economic welfare

ABSTRACT

Critics of economics often highlight two related issues: the empirical falsity of the ‘homo economicus’ assumption of rational, self-interested maximisation; and the ethical consequences of models based on this assumption. Yet many experiments in biology show non-human creatures often seem to behave as if they were rational maximisers, suggesting that context rather than cognitive capacity is important for determining behaviour. The critique of rational choice poses a less serious methodological challenge to economics than is sometimes thought. However, economists do need to respond to the ethical critique that decisions and policies based on the assumption of rational self-interested maximisation change the norms of individual behaviour for the worse. This paper argues that economics has become divorced from ethics because for a century it has dealt only with ordinal, not cardinal, welfare rankings and has thus ruled out interpersonal comparisons. While enabling economists to separate normative from positive analysis, this separation protocol has left welfare economics both internally contradictory and unable to address major societal decisions, even though welfare economics is used constantly in limited ways, such as cost-benefit analysis. This separation reflects empirically inaccurate assumptions concerning preference formation and the conditions of supply and demand (but not the rational choice assumption) in the foundational welfare economic theorems. Economics must urgently revisit welfare economics, particularly in the context of modern economies in which individuals are increasingly interdependent, and the assumptions required for the fundamental welfare theorems therefore increasingly invalid.     

Economic life, rights, and obligations: Perspectives from theological teleology

Even while acknowledging the autonomy of “laws” specific to economics, theology situates the view of economics as a “means-ends” science of human choices within an unavoidable overarching moral order. After all, economic life is merely part of a much larger personal quest for happiness. Thus, the efficient selection of means for particular ends necessarily takes place within the context of objective standards of economic rights and obligations as part of human nature. The teleological perspectives of theology add much to our understanding of economic life by providing the warrants for these rights and obligations.     

Problems of Emergency Arbitration

This paper explores ethical burdens facing the economics profession which are associated with epistemic features of economic practice. Economists exert power over those they purport to serve by virtue of epistemic asymmetry between themselves and others, i.e., the intellectual monopoly they enjoy over a vitally important body of knowledge. But they also face the problem of epistemic insufficiency, which implies that they may do substantial harm as they try to do good. The paper explores the ethical entailments of the epistemic features of economics, and argues that managing the ethical challenges requires a new field of inquiry, the field of professional economic ethics, and not just a code of conduct.     

Research Ethics Education in Economics

Abstract

In this paper, we report the findings from the data we collected from a survey in order to measure how common research ethics education in economics is. We have found out that (1) research ethics is taught in only a very few economics departments around the globe; (2) topics related to research ethics are not taught in courses on economics and ethics; and (3) the number of papers published in specialised peer-reviewed journals on economics education is only a tiny fraction of the number of papers published in these journals. There has been no evidence in economics showing that economics departments have taken strong initiative on teaching research ethics to undergraduate and graduate students.     

Economics of soft innovation: a review article

This article identifies and articulates the foundations of the theoretical approach of the new book ‘Soft innovation: Economics, product aesthetics and the creative industries’ by Professor Paul Stoneman. This book is likely to open a new research area within the economics of innovation. The source of economic growth and prosperity is technological change and the economics of innovation to date has mainly focused on technological approaches to innovation. However, the development of the technological base of product and process can explain only a part of economic growth as soft innovation represents a relevant additional source of economic development that has received little attention so far. The source of a unified economic approach for soft innovation relies on Lancaster's theory of consumer behaviour coupled with the variety approach, innovation in services and the economics of knowledge. It appears as though industry structures favouring the successive emergence of new variants are characterised by soft innovations.     

经济学研究的两大基本内容及其对知识结构的要求——对日益狭隘化的现代主流经济学之反思

经济学的根本目的是提高国民和社会的福利,这不仅关涉到自然资源的利用问题,而且关涉到人与人之间的社会关系。相应地,经济学的研究内容包含了伦理学和工程学两个方面:它们是相辅相成的,共同构建了整个经济学的理论大厦。事实上,不仅经济学与伦理学之间的关系源远流长,而且即使是专注于研究自然资源配置问题的主流经济学,也根本无法脱离具体的社会关系。正因如此,经济学的研究需要非常广泛的知识;否则,根本无法理解具体的经济现象,也无法提供合理的政策建议。然而,现代主流经济学日益局限于工程学一个方面,并极端地采取抽象化的分析路线,偏重于数理的训练而疏忽其他社会科学领域知识的吸收,从而造成了理论与现实的脱节。     

隔裂，还是融合？——阿马蒂亚·森论伦理学与经济学的关系

阿马蒂亚·森在其《伦理学与经济学》一书中提出并强调了经济学和伦理学应相互贯通、相互融合的思想。他认为,经济学和伦理学长期分离的历史事实对这两门学科的发展危害严重,在此基础上他提出了重新贯通经济学和伦理学之内在联系的观点。这一思想不仅具有特别重要的理论意义,而且有着不可忽视的现实价值。     

生态伦理观在公共经济政策中的培育与运用

生态环境危机是当今各国政府面临的重大难题,用生态伦理思想对待自然、协调入与自然之间的关系至关重要。生态伦理为公共经济政策的制订提供重要支持和参考。本文从伦理学和经济学角度阐述了生态伦理与公共经济政策的关系,提出了诸如加强生态环境法制建设、以技术创新为先导、鼓励发展潜势产业以及开征环境资源税等措施,探讨了矿区这一生态脆弱区的先进经验和有效做法,认为充分尊重并遵循生态伦理思想是新时代公共经济政策的必然选择。     

Getting beyond neo-institutionalism: Virgil Storr’s culture of markets

Storr is a free trader in ideas, bringing back into economics meaning, long banished by behaviorist dogma. His elegant little book, though, is too kind to neo-institutionalists. The followers of Douglass North, repeating without much thought over and over, “Institutions matter,” mean to say that “Institutions are constraints like budget lines. They are not human conversations.” Since the conversational character of markets is Storr’s main point, he would do better to make common cause with “humanomics,” that is, an economics keeping its mathematics and statistics but entering, too, the human conversation since the Epic of Gilgamesh.     

西方经济伦理研究的实验方法初探

随着实验经济学在经济学界越来越受重视,作为科学认识的经验认识方法的实验方法,逐渐被广泛运用于经济伦理学的研究.目前国外关于经济伦理学的实验主要有基于主体博弈的实验;基于计算机模拟仿真的实验和基于脑科学的实验三大类,这些实验都对传统经济学和经济伦理学的偏好理论、效用理论和"理性经济人"假设等提出了挑战.实验方法仍然是基于经验主义的传统,寻求实验力量与理性力量的结合,运用真正归纳法得出了普遍具有自然主义特征的经济伦理思想.实验方法虽然不可避免地会受到主观因素和环境因素的影响,但其具有可控可检的优势,可为我国完善经济伦理学研究方法论体系提供重要参考和借鉴.     

Marxism,Crypto-Marxism and the Political Economy of Capitalism

ABSTRACT

This article conducts groundwork for a discussion of Marx’s influence through examining the boundaries of the specifically Marxian school of economics. This Marxian school extends well beyond the bounds of the self-identified Marxian school. Marx’s influence, Marxian themes and effectively Marxian theory can be found in several important heterodox traditions of economics, though this is often unacknowledged. A consideration of the proper boundaries of the Marxian school of economics is essential for a full understanding of Marx’s legacy and could contribute to the emergence of a more unified heterodoxy in economics.