Philosophy of Management

, Volume 14, Issue 1, pp 47–66 | Cite as

The Unreality Business - How Economics (and Management) Became Anti-philosophical

Article

Abstract

This paper argues that economics, over the past 200 years, has become steadily more anti-philosophical and that there are three stages in the development of economic thought. Adam Smith intended economics to be a descriptive social science, rooted in an understanding of the moral and psychological processes of an individual’s decision-making and its connection to society in general. Yet, immediately after Smith’s death, economists made a clean cut and invented a totally new discipline: they switched towards a physicalist understanding of human nature. Humans, like atoms, follow a natural law: they are driven by an emotion (defined as a non-emotion, rationality), namely selfishness. Thus economics became a ‘natural’ science. In the 20th century, the second reinterpretation removed all traces of humanity from the study of economics and declared economics to be a formal science like mathematics and logics. The actor in Phase 3 economics is homo economicus syntheticus, a postulate whose only connection to real humanity is the word homo. The paper asks what the results of this dramatic relocation are and why Phase 3 economics still claims descent from Smithian economics, despite the massive differences.

Keywords

Economic theory Moral philosophy Philosophy of science Adam Smith 

References

  1. Albach, H. 2005. Betriebswirtschaftslehre ohne Unternehmensethik! Zeitschrift für Betriebswirtschaft 75(9): 809.Google Scholar
  2. Alvey, J.E. 1999. A short history of economics as a moral science. Journal of Markets & Morality 2(1): 52–73.Google Scholar
  3. Aristoteles. Nicomachean Ethics. http://classics.mit.edu/Aristotle/nicomachaen.html. Accessed in January 2015.
  4. Arrow, K.J., and F. Hahn. 1971. General competitive analysis. San Francisco: Holden Day.Google Scholar
  5. Aspen Institute. 2008. Where will they lead? 2008 MBA student attitudes about business and society. New York: Aspen Institute, Center for Business Education.Google Scholar
  6. Aspen Institute for Social Innovation Through Business. 2001. Where will they lead? MBA student attitudes about business and society. New York: Aspen Institute.Google Scholar
  7. Aßländer, M.S. 2014. John Stuart Mill on David Ricardo. In Companion to David Ricardo, ed. H.D. Kurz and N. Salvadori. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  8. Bedeain, D. 2014. Look on the bright side: A comparison of positive and negative role models in business ethics education. Academy of Management Learning & Education 13(1): 121–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Beer, S. 1966. Decision and control. London: John Wiley.Google Scholar
  10. Blaug, M. 1992. The methodology of economics: How economists explain. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Blosser, J. 2011. Christian freedom in political economy: The legacy of John Calvin in the thought of Adam Smith. In Adam Smith as theologian, ed. P. Oslington, 46–60. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  12. Bonar, J. 1922. Philosophy and political economy, 3rd ed. London: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
  13. Brat, D.A. 2005. ‘Adam Smith’s god and the end of economics’, in Virginia Economic Journal, presented at Virginia Association of Economists Meetings in Richmond, VA, March 2005.Google Scholar
  14. Brown, V. 1994. Adam's Smith discourse: Canonicity, commerce and conscience. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  15. Cadsby, C.B., and E. Maynes. 1998. Choosing between a socially efficient and free-riding equilibrium: Nurses versus economics and business students. Journal of Economic Behaviour and Organization 37: 31–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Calkins, M.J., and P.H. Werhane. 1998. Adam Smith, Aristotle, and the virtues of commerce. The Journal of Value Inquiry 32: 42–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Carrasco, A.M. 2004. Adam Smith’s reconstruction of practical reason. Review of Metaphysics 58(1): 81–116.Google Scholar
  18. Clarke, P.H. 2000. Adam Smith, stoicism and religion in the 18th century. History of the Human Sciences 13(4): 49–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Darwall, S. 1999. Sympathetic liberalism: Recent work on Adam Smith. Philosophy & Public Affairs 28(2): 139–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Darwall, S. 2004. Equal dignity in Adam Smith. The Adam Smith Review 1: 129–134.Google Scholar
  21. Den Uyl, D.J., and C.L. Griswold. 1996. Adam Smith on friendship and love. Review of Metaphysics 49(3): 609–637.Google Scholar
  22. Dierksmeier, C. 2011. The freedom-responsibility nexus in management philosophy and business ethics. Journal of Business Ethics 101(4): 263–283.Google Scholar
  23. Eastman, W., and J.R. Bailey. 1998. Crossroads—mediating the fact-value antinomy: Patterns in managerial and legal rhetoric, 1890–1990. Organization Science 9(2): 231–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Espejo, R., and R. Harnden (eds.). 1989. The viable system model: Interpretations and applications of Stafford Beer’s VSM. Chichester: Wiley.Google Scholar
  25. Etzioni, A. 2002. When it comes to ethics, B-schools get an F. The Washington Post 4: B4.Google Scholar
  26. Evensky, J. 1993. Adam Smith on the human foundation of a successful liberal society. History of Political Economy 25(3): 395–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Evensky, J. 2005. Adam Smith’s moral philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Feyerabend, P. 1993. Against method. London: Verso.Google Scholar
  29. Fitzgibbons, A. 1995. Adam Smith’s system of liberty, wealth and virtue. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  30. Fleischacker, S. 1991. Philosophy in moral practice: Kant and Adam Smith. Kant-Studien 82(3): 249–269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Foley, V. 1974. The division of labor in Plato and Smith. History of Political Economy 6(2): 220–242.Google Scholar
  32. Force, P. 2003. Self-interest before Adam Smith: A genealogy of economic science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Forman-Barzilai, F. 2010. Adam Smith and the circles of sympathy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Frank, B., and G.G. Schulze. 2000. Does economics make citizens corrupt? Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 43: 101–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Frank, R.H., T. Gilovich, and D.T. Regan. 1993. Does studying economics inhibit cooperation? Journal of Economic Perspectives 7(2): 159–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Frey, B.S., and S. Meier. 2003. Are political economists selfish and indoctrinated? Evidence from a natural experiment. Economic Inquiry 41(3): 448–462.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Friedman, M. 1953. Essays in positive economics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  38. Friedman, M. 1970. The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits. New York Times Magazine. September 13.Google Scholar
  39. Gergen, K.J. 2009. Realities and relationships: Soundings in social construction. Harvard: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  40. Ghoshal, S. 2005. Bad management theories are destroying good management practices. Academy of Management Learning & Education 4(1): 75–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Giddens, A. 1987. Social theory and modern sociology. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  42. Gossen, H.H. 1854/1983. The laws of human relations and the rules of human action derived therefrom. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  43. Griswold, C.L. 1999. Adam Smith and the virtues of enlightenment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  44. Griswold, C.L. 2010. Smith and Rousseau in dialogue. In Adam Smith review, vol. 5, ed. V. Brown, 59–84.Google Scholar
  45. Haakonssen, K. 1996. Natural law and moral philosophy: From Grotius to the Scottish enlightenment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Haakonssen, K., and D. Winch. 2006. The legacy of Adam Smith. In The Cambridge companion to Adam Smith, ed. K. Haakonssen, 366–394. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Haase, M., and Neuhäuser, C. 2013. Ethics, sustainability, and the homo economicus model: On the role of meta- and metametatheories. Unpublished presentation at the 8th Zittauer Gespraeche zur Unternehmens- und Wirtschaftsethik, October 2013, Zittau, Germany.Google Scholar
  48. Hanley, R.P. 2009. Adam Smith and the character of virtue. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Heise, P. 1995. Stoicism in the EPS: The foundation of Adam Smith’s moral philosophy. Perspectives in History of Economic Thought 11: 17–30.Google Scholar
  50. Hill, L. 2011. The hidden theology of Adam Smith. European Journal of the History of Economic Thought 8(1): 1–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Hühn, M.P. 2008. Unenlightened economism: The antecedents of bad corporate governance and ethical decline. Journal of Business Ethics 81(4): 823–835.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Hühn, M.P., and C. Dierksmeier. 2015. Will the real A. Smith please stand up! Journal of Business Ethics :1–14. DOI: 10.1007/s10551-014-2506-z.
  53. Hühn, M.P., and C. Kuhlmann. 2013. Der mißverstandene Mr. Smith. GWP - Gesellschaft Wirtschaft Politik 62(4): 503–510.Google Scholar
  54. Jensen, M.C. and W. Erhard. 2010. A ‘value-free’ approach to values. Harvard NOM Unit Research Paper No. 11–010, available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1640302.
  55. Klamer, A., D.N. McCloskey, and R.M. Solow (eds.). 1988. The consequences of economic rhetoric. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  56. Knight, F. 1921. Risk, uncertainty, and profit. Boston: Hart, Schaffner & Marx.Google Scholar
  57. Kuhn, T.S. 1962. The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  58. Lakatos, I. 1970. Falsification and the methodology of scientific research programmes. Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge 4: 91–196.Google Scholar
  59. Leddy, N. 2008. Adam Smith’s moral philosophy in the context of eighteenth-century French fiction. The Adam Smith Review 4: 158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Machlup, F. 1936. Why bother with methodology? Economica :39–45.Google Scholar
  61. Machlup, F. 1978. Methodology of economics and other social science. New York: Academic.Google Scholar
  62. MacIntyre, A. 2007. After virtue. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.Google Scholar
  63. Marwell, G., and R. Ames. 1981. Economists free ride, does anyone else? Journal of Public Economics 15: 295–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. McCabe, D.L., K.D. Butterfield, and L.K. Trevino. 2006. Academic dishonesty in graduate business programs: Prevalence, causes and proposed action. Academy of Management Learning & Education 5(3): 294–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. McCloskey, D.N. 1983. The rhetoric of economics. Journal of Economic Literature 21(2): 481–517.Google Scholar
  66. McCloskey, D.N. 1998. The rhetoric of economics. Madison: Univ of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
  67. McCloskey, D.N. 2006. The bourgeois virtues: ethics for an age of commerce. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. McCloskey, D.N. 2008. Adam Smith, the last of the former virtue ethicists. History of Political Economy 40(1): 43–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Mehta, P.B. 2006. Self-interest and other interests. In The Cambridge companion to Adam Smith, ed. K. Haakonssen, 246–269. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Menger, C. 1981. Principles of economics. New York: New York University Press.Google Scholar
  71. Mill, J. S. 1967. On the definition of political economy. In: Collected Works, Vol. 4–5: Essays on Economics and Society (University of Toronto Press, Toronto) Reprint Liberty Fund: Indianapolis 2006.Google Scholar
  72. Mirowski, P. 1989. More heat than light - economics as social physics: Physics as nature’s economics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Mitroff, I.I. 2004. An open letter to the deans and the faculties of American business schools. Journal of Business Ethics 54: 185–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Montes, L. 2008. Adam Smith as an eclectic stoic. In The Adam Smith review, ed. Brown, V., 4: 30–56.Google Scholar
  75. Muller, J.Z. 1995. Adam Smith in his time and ours: Designing a decent society. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  76. Nussbaum, M.C. 2000. “Mutilated and deformed”: Adam Smith on the material basis of human dignity. Castle Lectures at Yale in 2000, retrieved online at: http://dingo.sbs.arizona.edu/~dowen/Desktop/Final%20versions/nussbaum.doc in April 2014.
  77. Oslington, P. 2011. The future hope in Adam Smith’s system. Studies in Christian Ethics 24(3): 329–349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Oslington, P. 2012. God and the market: Adam Smith’s invisible hand. Journal of Business Ethics 108(4): 429–438.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Otteson, J.R. 2002. Adam Smith’s marketplace of life. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Pack, S.J. 2010. Aristotle, Adam Smith and Karl Marx: On some fundamental issues in 21st century political economy. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Pack, S.J., and E. Schliesser. 2006. Smith’s Humean criticism of Hume’s account of the origin of justice. Journal of the History of Philosophy 44(1): 47–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Pfeffer, J. 2005. Why do bad management theories persist? A comment on Ghoshal. Academy on Management Learning & Education 4(1): 96–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Podolny, J.M. 2009. The buck stops (and starts) at business school. Harvard Business Review 87(6): 62–67.Google Scholar
  84. Popper, K.R. 1982. Logik der Forschung. JCB Mohr (Paul Siebeck).Google Scholar
  85. Raphael, D.D. 1992. Adam Smith 1790: The man recalled, the philosopher revived. In Adam Smith reviewed, ed. P. Jones and A. Skinner, 93–118. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
  86. Raphael, D.D. 2007. The impartial spectator: Adam Smith’s moral philosophy. Oxford: Clarendon.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Raphael, D.D., and A.L. Macfie. 1976. Introduction. In The theory of moral sentiments, ed. A. Smith. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
  88. Rasche, A., D.U. Gilbert, and I. Schedel. 2013. Cross-disciplinary ethics education in MBA programs: Rhetoric or reality? Academy of Management Learning & Education 12(1): 71–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Rasmussen, D.C. 2008. The problems and promise of commercial society: Adam Smith’s response to Rousseau. Philadelphia: Penn State Press.Google Scholar
  90. Ross, I.S. 2004. Great works upon the anvil in 1785. The Adam Smith Review 1: 40–59.Google Scholar
  91. Ross, I.S. 2010. The Life of Adam Smith. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  92. Rothschild, E. 1998. Condorcet and Adam Smith on education and instruction. In Philosophers on education, ed. A.O. Rorty, 209–226. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  93. Rothschild, E. 2001. Economic sentiments - Adam Smith, Condorcet, and the enlightenment. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  94. Rutherford, M.A., L. Parks, D.E. Cavazos, and C.D. White. 2012. Business ethics as a required course: Investigating the factors impacting the decision to require ethics in the undergraduate business core curriculum. Academy of Management Learning & Education 11(2): 174–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. Schumpeter, J.A. 1954. History of economic analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  96. Sen, A. K. 1977. Rational fools: A critique of the behavioral foundations of economic theory. Philosophy & Public Affairs :317–344.Google Scholar
  97. Smith, A. 1776/1976. An enquiry into the nature and causes of the wealth of nations, Glasgow edition of the works and correspondence of Adam Smith, 2 vols. Glasgow: Glasgow Publishers.Google Scholar
  98. Smith, A. 1790/1976. The theory of moral sentiments, The Glasgow edition of the works and correspondence of Adam Smith, ed. by David Raphael, Vol. 1, Glasgow: Glasgow Publishers.Google Scholar
  99. Smith, A. 1982. Essays on philosophical subjects. In Glasgow edition of the works and correspondence of Adam Smith, vol. 3, ed. W.P.D. Wightman and J.C. Bryce. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund.Google Scholar
  100. Solomon, R.C. 1993. Review: Beyond selfishness: Adam Smith and the limits of the market. Business Ethics Quarterly 3(4): 453–460.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. Solomon, R.C. 2008. Free enterprise, sympathy, and virtue. In The Critical Role of Values in the Economy, ed. P.J. Zak, 16–41. Princeton and Oxford: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  102. Stigler, G. 1971. Smith’s travels on the ship of state. History of Political Economy 3: 237–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. Tugendhat, E. 2004. Universalistically approved intersubjective attitudes: Adam Smith. In The Adam Smith review, vol. 1, ed. V. Brown, 88–104.Google Scholar
  104. Varela, F.G., H.R. Maturana, and R. Uribe. 1974. Autopoiesis: The organization of living systems, its characterization and a model. Biosystems 5(4): 187–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. Viner, J. 1927. Adam Smith and laissez faire. The Journal of Political Economy 35(2): 198–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. Viner, J. 1972. The role of providence in the social order. Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society.Google Scholar
  107. Vivenza, G. 1984. Adam Smith e la cultura classica. Pisa: IPEM.Google Scholar
  108. Vivenza, G. 2001. Adam Smith and the classic: The Classical heritage in Adam Smith’s thought. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. von Hayek, F.A. 1975. The pretence of knowledge. The Swedish Journal of Economics 77(4): 433–442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  110. Wang, L., D. Malhotra, and J.K. Murnighan. 2011. Economics education and greed. Academy of Management Learning & Education 10(4): 643–660.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  111. Waszek, N. 1984. Two concepts of morality: A distinction of Adam Smith’s ethics and its stoic origin. Journal of the History of Ideas :591–606.Google Scholar
  112. Waterman, A.M.C. 2002. Economics as theology: Adam Smith’s wealth of nations. Southern Economic Journal 6: 907–921.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  113. Werhane, P.H. 2004. A comment on Emma Rothschild’s economic sentiments. The Adam Smith Review 1: 135–140.Google Scholar
  114. Williams, B. 2006. Ethics and the limits of philosophy. London & New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  115. Winch, D. 1978. Adam Smith’s politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  116. Yezer, A., R. Goldfarb, and P. Poppen. 1996. Does studying economics discourage cooperation? Watch what we do, not what we say or how we play. Journal of Economic Perspectives 10(1): 177–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  117. Young, J.T. 1997. Economics as a moral science. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.Google Scholar
  118. Zúñiga, G.L. 1997. Scholastic economics: Thomistic value theory. Religion & Liberty 7(4): 5–7.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.China Europe International Business SchoolShanghaiChina

Personalised recommendations