You may have detected an explicit Swift-esque theme to the title heading this blog - that's because of the over-elucidated way in which calculated individuals like Adam Smith conducted their work, which, despite the integral astuteness and assiduity of the subject, tends to undermine the central content. In short, and without satire, works on whatever subject need not be so discursive. Brevity is a boon to the author and audience alike (as Addison rightly suggested in his Spectator essay, no.476).
Thus, I digress; though, not without knowing.
To announce the main direction of my argument, which revolves around the study of political economy and some of its prominent advocates (Smith included), it is foremost to begin with a few representational quotes on the study:
the first, of Adam Smith: "That order of things which necessity imposes in general, though not in every particular country, is, in every particular country, promoted by the natural inclinations of man" (referring to the instinct which drives an individual to accumulate better wealth for themselves - this gradually, combined with the similar progress of many others, encourages much wider prosperity, economic and otherwise);
the second, also of Smith: "A revolution of the greatest importance to the public happiness was in this manner brought about by two different orders of people who had not the least intention to serve the public...Neither of them had either knowledge or foresight of the great revolution which the folly of one, and the industry of the other, was gradually bringing about" (also referring to the inadvertent instinct - Smith noted this as the nature of the 'hidden hand of the market', which equates to the proposed 'law of unintended consequences').
The study of political economy, for which Adam Smith has been ascribed an early contributor to, aims to reveal the inner operations, functions and subsequent progress of a society's economy on the basis of natural laws obeyed by human systems. These natural laws are, in effect, the determinate drivers of human movement along the line of social mobility, as originated by human society, which can also be seen as a product of natural law/or instinct. Simply put, political economy is the study of the average cumulative wealth of members of society, of which a majority wealth and further benefit is gained. Smith hit the nail on the head when he said, "the rising tide (of economic prosperity) lifts all boats, large and small".
In political economy, as in economics, a more empirical formula is adhered to. In regards to the laws of nature - those which determine our individual motives, and thus our successive progress as an advanced, superior species - patterns, trends and properties of the various national economies across the world can be analysed, compared and understood. A Manual of Political Economy, by E. Peshine Smith, states: "Knowledge gives power, because when a law is once perceived and understood man can conform to it, for the purpose of producing an effect he desires, by arranging the ascertained causes in that method of grouping which the law dictates, instead of wasting his energies and missing his object, in blind endeavours to obtain it in a way other than that which the Lord of Nature has appointed." Basically, after cutting to the crux of its causes, mankind can finally begin to learn to govern its immutable instincts and make use of what comes naturally.
In economics, E. Peshine Smith induces "the insufficiency and falseness of the system of the English Economists, considered rather as an art, giving directions for the practical conduct of men and States, than as a science". Economics is traditionally based on mathematics and axiomatic thought. Adam Smith, once a Professor of Logic and Moral Philosophy, and other thinkers like him focus on the understanding of economies through more humanistic means. This method of thought has contributed to the development of other associated disciplines, such as political science and economics.
Whether or not political economy is the pre-eminent context by which economies and their subordinate faculties should be examined by remains to be seen. And like the basis of political economy, what came before will become evidence to support the natural law of prevailing human conduct in the markets.
E. Peshine Smith summarises the guiding principles of political economy in a manner pertinent to Adam Smith and the nature of prosperity:
"Adam Smith, in entitling h
is great work An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations, and in the manner in which he treated the subject, exhibited a much more just conception of the scope of the science (economics), of which he was laying the foundation. If we attribute to the word "wealth" the signification it once bore, of "weal, well-being", this title will differ little from our statement of the object of Political Economy. If the outline of its leading principles we are about to sketch be correct, it will appear that the greatest wealth of nations, in its common acceptation, is only consistent with such a distribution of it, as enables their people, of all classes, to cultivate the higher powers and affections of humanity; that such a distribution is effected by the regular operation of natural laws, and only prevented by attempts to control them, dictated by ignorance and injustice."
This, however much truth entailed, is not the case for most societies, as governments continue to impose their regulations on what they generally perceive to be a system of man-made markets controlled by man-made motives. The former may be so, but the latter is something that needs bringing into questioning. It may be that even departments of society as desensitised and technologically reliant as economies are subject to the innate and irrevocable capacity of natural human instincts, not just external theories.
Here is a useful link to E. Peshine Smith's Manual of Political Economy:
http://www.efm.bris.ac.uk/het/smithpeshine/Manual%20of%20Political%20Economy.pdf
Thus, I digress; though, not without knowing.
To announce the main direction of my argument, which revolves around the study of political economy and some of its prominent advocates (Smith included), it is foremost to begin with a few representational quotes on the study:
the first, of Adam Smith: "That order of things which necessity imposes in general, though not in every particular country, is, in every particular country, promoted by the natural inclinations of man" (referring to the instinct which drives an individual to accumulate better wealth for themselves - this gradually, combined with the similar progress of many others, encourages much wider prosperity, economic and otherwise);
the second, also of Smith: "A revolution of the greatest importance to the public happiness was in this manner brought about by two different orders of people who had not the least intention to serve the public...Neither of them had either knowledge or foresight of the great revolution which the folly of one, and the industry of the other, was gradually bringing about" (also referring to the inadvertent instinct - Smith noted this as the nature of the 'hidden hand of the market', which equates to the proposed 'law of unintended consequences').
The study of political economy, for which Adam Smith has been ascribed an early contributor to, aims to reveal the inner operations, functions and subsequent progress of a society's economy on the basis of natural laws obeyed by human systems. These natural laws are, in effect, the determinate drivers of human movement along the line of social mobility, as originated by human society, which can also be seen as a product of natural law/or instinct. Simply put, political economy is the study of the average cumulative wealth of members of society, of which a majority wealth and further benefit is gained. Smith hit the nail on the head when he said, "the rising tide (of economic prosperity) lifts all boats, large and small".
In political economy, as in economics, a more empirical formula is adhered to. In regards to the laws of nature - those which determine our individual motives, and thus our successive progress as an advanced, superior species - patterns, trends and properties of the various national economies across the world can be analysed, compared and understood. A Manual of Political Economy, by E. Peshine Smith, states: "Knowledge gives power, because when a law is once perceived and understood man can conform to it, for the purpose of producing an effect he desires, by arranging the ascertained causes in that method of grouping which the law dictates, instead of wasting his energies and missing his object, in blind endeavours to obtain it in a way other than that which the Lord of Nature has appointed." Basically, after cutting to the crux of its causes, mankind can finally begin to learn to govern its immutable instincts and make use of what comes naturally.
In economics, E. Peshine Smith induces "the insufficiency and falseness of the system of the English Economists, considered rather as an art, giving directions for the practical conduct of men and States, than as a science". Economics is traditionally based on mathematics and axiomatic thought. Adam Smith, once a Professor of Logic and Moral Philosophy, and other thinkers like him focus on the understanding of economies through more humanistic means. This method of thought has contributed to the development of other associated disciplines, such as political science and economics.
Whether or not political economy is the pre-eminent context by which economies and their subordinate faculties should be examined by remains to be seen. And like the basis of political economy, what came before will become evidence to support the natural law of prevailing human conduct in the markets.
E. Peshine Smith summarises the guiding principles of political economy in a manner pertinent to Adam Smith and the nature of prosperity:
"Adam Smith, in entitling h
is great work An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations, and in the manner in which he treated the subject, exhibited a much more just conception of the scope of the science (economics), of which he was laying the foundation. If we attribute to the word "wealth" the signification it once bore, of "weal, well-being", this title will differ little from our statement of the object of Political Economy. If the outline of its leading principles we are about to sketch be correct, it will appear that the greatest wealth of nations, in its common acceptation, is only consistent with such a distribution of it, as enables their people, of all classes, to cultivate the higher powers and affections of humanity; that such a distribution is effected by the regular operation of natural laws, and only prevented by attempts to control them, dictated by ignorance and injustice."This, however much truth entailed, is not the case for most societies, as governments continue to impose their regulations on what they generally perceive to be a system of man-made markets controlled by man-made motives. The former may be so, but the latter is something that needs bringing into questioning. It may be that even departments of society as desensitised and technologically reliant as economies are subject to the innate and irrevocable capacity of natural human instincts, not just external theories.
Here is a useful link to E. Peshine Smith's Manual of Political Economy:
http://www.efm.bris.ac.uk/het/smithpeshine/Manual%20of%20Political%20Economy.pdf
No comments:
Post a Comment