IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/mlucee/201903.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Interview: Innovationen und Institutionen - Über Markt, Moral und Moderne

Author

Listed:
  • Pies, Ingo

Abstract

Dieses Interview erläutert das Moralparadoxon der Moderne und seine Bedeutung für die demokratische Wirtschafts- und Gesellschaftspolitik. Auf diese Weise bietet es Einblicke in das 'ordonomische' Forschungsprogramm: welche Fragen gestellt werden, wie diese Fragen gestellt werden und wie die Antworten beschaffen sind, die sich mit der ordonomischen Methode erarbeiten lassen. Der inhaltliche Schwerpunkt dieses Interviews liegt darauf, die Bedeutung (und insbesondere die moralischen Implikationen) von Innovationen für die moderne post-malthusianische Wachstumsgesellschaft hervorzuheben.

Suggested Citation

  • Pies, Ingo, 2019. "Interview: Innovationen und Institutionen - Über Markt, Moral und Moderne," Discussion Papers 2019-03, Martin Luther University of Halle-Wittenberg, Chair of Economic Ethics.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:mlucee:201903
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/204440/1/1677249560.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Christina Starmans & Mark Sheskin & Paul Bloom, 2017. "Why people prefer unequal societies," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 1(4), pages 1-7, April.
    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. Dani Rodrik, 2018. "Populism and the economics of globalization," Journal of International Business Policy, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 1(1), pages 12-33, June.
    2. Filip Gesiarz & Jan-Emmanuel De Neve & Tali Sharot, 2020. "The motivational cost of inequality: Opportunity gaps reduce the willingness to work," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(9), pages 1-18, September.
    3. Andrés Rodríguez-Pose & Neil Lee & Cornelius Lipp, 2021. "Golfing with Trump. Social capital, decline, inequality, and the rise of populism in the US," Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 14(3), pages 457-481.
    4. Cuenca, Juan J. & Daly, Hannah E. & Hayes, Barry P., 2023. "Sharing the grid: The key to equitable access for small-scale energy generation," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 349(C).
    5. Gürdal, Mehmet Y. & Torul, Orhan & Vostroknutov, Alexander, 2020. "Norm compliance, enforcement, and the survival of redistributive institutions," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 178(C), pages 313-326.
    6. Barbara Dluhosch, 2018. "Trade, Inequality, and Subjective Well-Being: Getting at the Roots of the Backlash Against Globalization," LIS Working papers 741, LIS Cross-National Data Center in Luxembourg.
    7. Andreas Siemoneit, 2021. "Justice as a Social Bargain and Optimization Problem," Papers 2106.00830, arXiv.org.
    8. Hsuan-Wei Lee & Yen-Ping Chang & Yen-Sheng Chiang, 2020. "Status hierarchy and group cooperation: A generalized model," Papers 2004.00944, arXiv.org, revised Aug 2020.
    9. Fehr, Dietmar & Rau, Hannes & Trautmann, Stefan T. & Xu, Yilong, 2020. "Inequality, fairness and social capital," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 129(C).
    10. Bahník, Štěpán & Vranka, Marek Albert, 2022. "Reward perception, but not reward inequality is associated with increased bribe-taking in a laboratory task," OSF Preprints n7atx, Center for Open Science.
    11. Milena Tsvetkova & Claudia Wagner & Andrew Mao, 2018. "The emergence of inequality in social groups: Network structure and institutions affect the distribution of earnings in cooperation games," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(7), pages 1-16, July.
    12. Tian, Songtao & Liu, Zhirong, 2020. "Emergence of income inequality: Origin, distribution and possible policies," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 537(C).
    13. Clemens Knoppe, 2018. "Wage Income Distribution and Mobility in Malta," CBM Working Papers WP/06/2018, Central Bank of Malta.
    14. Ingrid Robeyns & Vincent Buskens & Arnout Rijt & Nina Vergeldt & Tanja Lippe, 2021. "How Rich is Too Rich? Measuring the Riches Line," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 154(1), pages 115-143, February.
    15. Eric S. M. Protzer, 2019. "Social Mobility Explains Populism, Not Inequality or Culture," CID Working Papers 118a, Center for International Development at Harvard University.
    16. Duong, Khanh & Nguyen Phuc Van, 2023. "Inequality is not always a political choice, but reducing it (to an optimal degree) is," GLO Discussion Paper Series 1352, Global Labor Organization (GLO).
    17. Andreas Bergh & Anders Kärnä, 2022. "Explaining the rise of populism in European democracies 1980–2018: The role of labor market institutions and inequality," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 103(7), pages 1719-1731, December.
    18. Ming-Chang Tsai, 2019. "The Good, the Bad, and the Ordinary: The Day-of-the-Week Effect on Mood Across the Globe," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 20(7), pages 2101-2124, October.
    19. Johnson, Samuel G. B., 2019. "Toward a cognitive science of markets: Economic agents as sense-makers," Economics - The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal (2007-2020), Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel), vol. 13, pages 1-29.
    20. Pies, Ingo, 2023. "Folk economics and folk ethics as problems of moral reasoning: Ordonomic inspirations for business ethics," Discussion Papers 2023-13, Martin Luther University of Halle-Wittenberg, Chair of Economic Ethics.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Wirtschaftsethik; Ordonomik; Moralparadoxon der Moderne; Innovation; Wachstum; Diskursversagen; economic ethics; ordonomics; moral paradox of modernity; innovation; growth; discourse failure;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:zbw:mlucee:201903. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/wwhalde.html .

    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.