IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/ecnphi/v28y2012i03p333-362_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Adam Smith And The Modern Science Of Ethics

Author

Listed:
  • Konow, James

Abstract

Third-party decision-makers, or spectators, have emerged as a useful empirical tool in modern social science research on moral motivation. Spectators of a sort also serve a central role in Adam Smith's moral theory. This paper compares these two types of spectatorship with respect to their goals, methodologies, visions of human nature and emphasis on moral rules. I find important similarities and differences and conclude that this comparison suggests significant opportunities for philosophical ethics to inform empirical and theoretical research on moral preferences and vice versa.

Suggested Citation

  • Konow, James, 2012. "Adam Smith And The Modern Science Of Ethics," Economics and Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 28(3), pages 333-362, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:ecnphi:v:28:y:2012:i:03:p:333-362_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0266267112000272/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Becchetti, Leonardo & Degli Antoni, Giacomo & Ottone, Stefania & Solferino, Nazaria, 2013. "Allocation criteria under task performance: The gendered preference for protection," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 96-111.
    2. Albert D. Spalding & Gretchen R. Lawrie, 2019. "A Critical Examination of the AICPA’s New “Conceptual Framework” Ethics Protocol," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 155(4), pages 1135-1152, April.
    3. Konow, James & Saijo, Tatsuyoshi & Akai, Kenju, 2016. "Equity versus Equality," MPRA Paper 75376, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Ahmed S. Abou-Zaid & Tesa Leonce, 2014. "Religious Pluralism, yet a Homogenous Stance on Interest Rate: The Case of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam," Contemporary Economics, University of Economics and Human Sciences in Warsaw., vol. 8(2), June.
    5. Cappelen, Alexander W. & de Haan, Thomas & Tungodden, Bertil, 2024. "Fairness and limited information: Are people Bayesian meritocrats?," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 233(C).

    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:cup:ecnphi:v:28:y:2012:i:03:p:333-362_00. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/eap .

    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.