Economics as a Moral Science: Menger vs. Keynes

novitàdigital Economics as a Moral Science: Menger vs. Keynes

Articolo

rivista	RIVISTA DI FILOSOFIA NEO-SCOLASTICA
sezione	Online First
titolo	Economics as a Moral Science: Menger vs. Keynes
autore	Paolo Gomarasca
editore	Vita e Pensiero
formato	Articolo \| Pdf
online da	03-2021
doi	10.26350/001050_000256
issn	00356247 (stampa) \| 18277926 (digitale)

€ 6,00

Ebook in formato Pdf leggibile su questi device:

Computer
con Software:
- Adobe PDF Reader
Android
iPhone/Ipad
con App:
- Adobe PDF Reader
E-Book Reader
Ibs Tolino
Kobo

Descrizione
As known, Menger endorses a typically Weberian thesis: Economics should be conceived as a value-free science. On the contrary, Keynes seems to argue that economics should be considered a moral science. This paper intends to prove a) a possible compatibility at the epistemological level and b) an agreement even at the ethical level. For these reasons, this paper is structured in two parts: 1) The first part examines the two ‘competing’ models in order to argue that a) the Mengerian model does not entail hostility against the ethical evaluation on economics and b) the Keynesian model does not mean that theoretical economics should be considered as epistemologically dependent upon a given system of moral precepts. 2) The second part intends to highlight that the epistemological agreement is linked to a similar standpoint in ethics: the common rejection of the love of money. keywords Menger, Keynes, Love of Money, Ethics Biografia dell'autore Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Milano. Email: paolo.gomarasca@unicatt.it

Descrizione

As known, Menger endorses a typically Weberian thesis: Economics should be conceived as a value-free science. On the contrary, Keynes seems to argue that economics should be considered a moral science. This paper intends to prove a) a possible compatibility at the epistemological level and b) an agreement even at the ethical level. For these reasons, this paper is structured in two parts: 1) The first part examines the two ‘competing’ models in order to argue that a) the Mengerian model does not entail hostility against the ethical evaluation on economics and b) the Keynesian model does not mean that theoretical economics should be considered as epistemologically dependent upon a given system of moral precepts. 2) The second part intends to highlight that the epistemological agreement is linked to a similar standpoint in ethics: the common rejection of the love of money.