IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/ajecsc/v67y2008i3p455-471.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Classical Equality: On the Content of Analytical Egalitarianism

Author

Listed:
  • Joseph Persky

Abstract

. Sandra Peart and David Levy in The “Vanity of the Philosopher” champion a concept of “analytical egalitarianism.” Equality is a difficult concept. Peart and Levy attempt to reconstruct analytical egalitarianism from the classical writing of British political economy from Adam Smith to John Stuart Mill. Aspects of this reconstruction touch on a number of different egalitarian conceptions, including: (1) equality of capacity and talent, (2) racial equality, (3) equality in the marketplace, (4) equality of opportunity, (5) equality of material conditions, (6) equality of happiness, (7) equality before God, and (8) political equality. This paper briefly considers the relation of each of these equalities to Peart and Levy's analytical egalitarianism. The hope is that such exercises can help elucidate Peart and Levy's reinterpretation of classical economic's understanding of equality. A central theme does emerge. Peart and Levy, echoing the classical economists themselves, seem reluctant to follow their radical assumptions concerning talent and capacity for happiness to radical conclusions concerning the appropriate provenance of redistributional policies.

Suggested Citation

  • Joseph Persky, 2008. "Classical Equality: On the Content of Analytical Egalitarianism," American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 67(3), pages 455-471, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:ajecsc:v:67:y:2008:i:3:p:455-471
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1536-7150.2008.00583.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1536-7150.2008.00583.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1536-7150.2008.00583.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Levy, David M., 2001. "How the Dismal Science Got its Name: Debating Racial Quackery," Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Cambridge University Press, vol. 23(1), pages 5-35, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Tim Hallett & Matthew Gougherty, 2024. "Learning to Think Like an Economist without Becoming One: Ambivalent Reproduction and Policy Couplings in a Masters of Public Affairs Program," American Sociological Review, , vol. 89(2), pages 227-255, April.
    2. Wohlgemuth, Michael, 2008. "A European social model of state-market relations: the ethics of competition from a neo-liberal perspective," Freiburg Discussion Papers on Constitutional Economics 08/9, Walter Eucken Institut e.V..
    3. Levy, David M. & Peart, Sandra J. & Farrant, Andrew, 2005. "The spatial politics of F.A. Hayek's Road to Serfdom," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 21(4), pages 982-999, December.
    4. David Levy & Sandra J. Peart, 2010. "Richard Whately and the Gospel of Transparency," American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 69(1), pages 166-187, January.
    5. Robert Dixon, 2006. "Carlyle, Malthus and Sismondi: The Origins of Carlyle’s Dismal View of Political Economy," History of Economics Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 44(1), pages 32-38, January.
    6. Kevin D. Hoover, 2008. "The Vanity of the Economist: A Comment on Peart and Levy's The “Vanity of the Philosopher”," American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 67(3), pages 445-453, July.
    7. Ramya Vijaya, 2006. "Book Reviews," Review of Social Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 65(3), pages 349-385.
    8. Groß Steffen W., 2010. "Warum sich Ökonomen (wieder) mit Philosophie beschäftigen sollten – und Philosophen (wieder) mit Ökonomie / Why Economists should be more interested in Philosophy (again) – and why Philosophers should," ORDO. Jahrbuch für die Ordnung von Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft, De Gruyter, vol. 61(1), pages 75-94, January.
    9. Robert W. Dimand, 2005. "Economists and the Shadow of “The Other” Before 1914," American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 64(3), pages 827-850, July.
    10. A. M. C. Waterman, 2002. "The 'Sussex School' and the history of economic thought: British Intellectual History, 1750-1950," The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(3), pages 452-463.
    11. James M. Buchanan, 2005. "Natural Equality, Increasing Returns, And Economic Progress: A Reinterpretation Of Adam Smith'S System," Division of Labor & Transaction Costs (DLTC), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 1(01), pages 57-66.
    12. Levy, David M. & Peart, Sandra J., 2004. "Statistical prejudice: from eugenics to immigrants," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 20(1), pages 5-22, March.
    13. Roger Koppl & E. James Cowan, 2010. "A Battle of Forensic Experts is not a Race to the Bottom," Review of Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(2), pages 235-262.
    14. Khalil, Elias, 2007. "The Mirror-Neuron Paradox: How Far is Sympathy from Compassion, Indulgence, and Adulation?," MPRA Paper 3509, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    15. Juan Pablo Couyoumdjian, 2008. "An Expert at Work: Revisiting Jeremy Bentham's Proposals on Codification," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(4), pages 503-519, November.
    16. Miller, S.M., 2004. "New classical versus neoclassical frameworks: a review of Yang," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 55(2), pages 175-185, October.
    17. Andrew Farrant, 2008. "The “Vanity of the Philosopher”: Analytical Egalitarianism, Associationist Psychology, and Eugenic Remaking?," American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 67(3), pages 415-428, July.
    18. McCloskey, Deirdre Nansen, 2009. "Britain, China, and the Irrelevance of Stage Theories," MPRA Paper 18291, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    19. Medema, Steven G, 2024. ""I Get by With a Little Help From My Friends ...": An Editor’s Retrospective," SocArXiv nujcm, Center for Open Science.
    20. Munger, Michael C., 2011. "Persuasion, psychology and public choice," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 80(2), pages 290-300.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:ajecsc:v:67:y:2008:i:3:p:455-471. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0002-9246 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.