![]() ![]() ![]() What is surprising is the primacy that smith attributes to the division of labor in economic spheres: He believes it makes workers more dextrous in labor but most stunted in mind and character. He attributes it economic success and the much less mentioned moral decline which Marx inherits and critiques. Smith’s view on the division of labor, much as his views on many things are ambivalent but mostly positive. This happens by virtue of the market sphere. In order to compete with others in the market sphere, we constantly innovate, create better health care systems, treat our workers better. ![]() In this way, smith presents a teleology of history and the motor behind his is self-interest. Not for every action but in the long run. All of these however are formed simply by everyone pursuing their narrow self-interests. Smith believes that the wealth of nations are caused by the division of labor, the broadening of markets, and the establishment of money. The aim of WoN is simply to explain how countries can be wealthy. Question: does he ever challenge this assumption? This seems contradictory with his psychological view, how we gain happiness from the more relativistic sympathy rather than the absolutist wealth. It seems to run contradictory to how he thinks sympathy is our greatest source of happiness no? He seems to reject this notion that greatness and wealth is what we should strive towards in the Theory.Īnswer: Theory of moral sentiments and wealth of nations don't operate on the same level. He is content on just talking about how to increase the wealth of nations because he believes that more wealth relates to more happiness. This is an implicit assumption that he holds that does most of his normative work. He believes that wealth and happiness are inextricably linked. It is a paradigm shift comparable to the origin of species. His opponent at this time is a proponent of mercantilism - the idea that a country can only get rich if another country becomes poor which leads encouraging exports and discouraging imports. The goal of this book is to determine why some nations are wealthier than others. The invisible hand both functions on the personal level by providing moral boundaries and on the system level by directing goods.Īs opposed to what many may conceive of Smith, he believed that governments should be responsible for a whole host of activities that are for the public good: defense, police, justice, education. These constraints are antagonistic to the incentive of corporations however. Smith’s invisible hand and whole claim about laissez-faire economics operates in very specific constraints that aren’t in effect today. He proposes a basic labor theory of value that eventually Marx adopts. The advent of money is important for both the division of labor as well as free trade since it reduces friction during bartering. Also since all production of goods are for the consumer, he believe free trade is in the interest of the consumer as opposed to the producers (this is the birth of consumerism). Smith is an advocate of free trade because it further encourages the division of labor but also it is the logical solution when you conceive of a countries wealth not according to how many paper bills it has but to the amount of production it has (he introduces this notion which evolves into GDP). But it is morally detrimental as it makes an individual focused on a very narrow and confined sphere. The division of labor is economically good, generating immense surplus from the increased innovation, efficiency, and dexterity of its workers. Smith attributes the wealth of nations to the division of labor, free markets, and the advent of money. Smith seeks to answer the question what makes some nations wealthier while others poorer. ![]() With that said, I’ve decided to share these unedited notes on the off chance they are helpful to other readers. These notes were created during my reading process to aid my own understanding and not written for the purpose of instruction. My preferred way of engaging with books is reconstruction. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |