IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/jbuset/v196y2025i3d10.1007_s10551-024-05680-5.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Ethical Embeddedness of the Economic Inequality Debate

Author

Listed:
  • Mikko Ketokivi

    (IE University)

  • Sebastien M. Fosse

    (ESC Clermont Business School/CleRMa)

  • Peter Kawalek

    (Loughborough University)

Abstract

How do scholars formulate arguments about economic inequality? What is the role of empirical analysis? In what ways, if any, is the debate informed by ethical considerations? In this paper, we address these questions by evaluating one of the main arguments in Thomas Piketty’s 2014 book Capital in the Twenty-First Century, along with its endorsements and rebuttals. Applying Stephen Toulmin’s model of arguments to Piketty unearths a complex argument structure that must be understood for an evaluation to be possible. Of particular importance are the warrants that Piketty used to justify his conclusions from the empirical material. Our analysis revealed that the most influential rebuttals were targeted not at Piketty’s empirical inferences but the way he used these inferences to justify his claims. We also found value judgments to be an essential part of the justification process, making Piketty’s claims ultimately embedded in ethical considerations. We conclude that value judgments are intrinsic to scholarly arguments not only in economic inequality debates but also more broadly.

Suggested Citation

  • Mikko Ketokivi & Sebastien M. Fosse & Peter Kawalek, 2025. "The Ethical Embeddedness of the Economic Inequality Debate," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 196(3), pages 565-580, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:jbuset:v:196:y:2025:i:3:d:10.1007_s10551-024-05680-5
    DOI: 10.1007/s10551-024-05680-5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10551-024-05680-5
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10551-024-05680-5?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    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:kap:jbuset:v:196:y:2025:i:3:d:10.1007_s10551-024-05680-5. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.