HEGEL, GEORG WILHELM FRIEDRICH (1770-1831) :
Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
| Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel | |
| | |
| Full name | Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel |
| Born | August 27, 1770 |
| Died | |
| Era | |
| Region | Western Philosophy |
| German Idealism; Founder ofHegelianism; Historicism | |
| Main interests | Logic, Philosophy of history,Aesthetics, Religion, Metaphysics,Epistemology, Political Philosophy, |
| Notable ideas | Absolute idealism, Dialectic,Sublation, master-slave dialectic |
| Influenced by[show] | |
| Influence on[show] | |
GEORG WILHELM FRIEDRICH HEGEL (German pronunciation: [ˈɡeɔʁk ˈvɪlhɛlm ˈfʁiːdʁɪç ˈheːɡəl]) (August 27, 1770 – November 14, 1831) was a German philosopher, one of the creators of German Idealism. His historicist and idealist account of reality as a whole revolutionized European philosophy and was an important precursor to Continental philosophy and Marxism.
Hegel developed a comprehensive philosophical framework, or "system", of Absolute idealism to account in an integrated and developmental way for the relation of mind and nature, the subject and object of knowledge, and psychology, the state, history, art, religion and philosophy. In particular, he developed the concept that mind or spirit manifested itself in a set of contradictions and oppositions that it ultimately integrated and united, without eliminating either pole or reducing one to the other. Examples of such contradictions include those between nature and freedom, and between immanence and transcendence.
Hegel influenced writers of widely varying positions, including both his admirers (Strauss, Bauer,Feuerbach, T. H. Green, Marx, F. H. Bradley, Dewey, Sartre, Küng, Kojève, Fukuyama, Žižek,Brandom, Iqbal) and his detractors (Schopenhauer, Schelling, Kierkegaard, Nietzsche, Stirner, Peirce, Popper, Russell, Heidegger).[2] His influential conceptions are of speculative logic or "dialectic", "absolute idealism", "Spirit", negativity, sublation (Aufhebung in German), the"Master/Slave" dialectic, "ethical life" and the importance of history.
[edit]Life
[edit]Early years
[edit]Childhood
Hegel was born on August 27, 1770 in Stuttgart, in the Duchy Württemberg in southwestern Germany. Christened Georg Wilhelm Friedrich, he was known as Wilhelm to his close family. His father, Georg Ludwig, was Rentkammersekretär (secretary to the revenue office) at the court of Karl Eugen, Duke of Württemberg.[3] Hegel's mother, Maria Magdalena Louisa (née Fromm), was the daughter of a lawyer at the High Court of Justice at the Württemberg court. She died of a "bilious fever" (Gallenfieber) when Hegel was eleven. Hegel and his father also caught the disease but narrowly survived.[4] Hegel had a sister, Christiane Luise (1773–1832), and a brother, Georg Ludwig (1776–1812), who was to perish as an officer in Napoleon's Russian campaign of 1812.[5]
At the age of three Hegel went to the "German School". When he entered the "Latin School" aged five, he already knew the first declension, having been taught it by his mother.
In 1776 Hegel entered Stuttgart's Gymnasium Illustre. During his adolescence Hegel read voraciously, copying lengthy extracts in his diary. Authors he read include the poet Klopstock and writers associated with the Enlightenment such as Christian Garve and Gotthold Ephraim Lessing. Hegel's studies at the Gymnasium were concluded with his Abiturrede ("graduation speech") entitled "The abortive state of art and scholarship in Turkey."
[edit]Tübingen (1788-93)
At the age of eighteen Hegel entered the Tübinger Stift (a Protestant seminary attached to the University of Tübingen), where two fellow students were to become vital to his development – his exact contemporary, the poet Friedrich Hölderlin, and the younger brilliant philosopher-to-be Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph Schelling. Sharing a dislike for what they regarded as the restrictive environment of the Seminary, the three became close friends and mutually influenced each other's ideas. They watched the unfolding of the French Revolution with shared enthusiasm. Schelling and Hölderlin immersed themselves in theoretical debates on Kantian philosophy, from which Hegel remained aloof. Hegel at this time envisaged his future as that of a Popularphilosoph, i.e., a "man of letters" who serves to make the abstruse ideas of philosophers accessible to a wider public; his own felt need to engage critically with the central ideas of Kantianism did not come until 1800.
[edit]Bern (1793–96) and Frankfurt (1797–1801)
Having received his theological certificate (Konsistorialexamen) from the Tübingen Seminary, Hegel became Hofmeister (house tutor) to an aristocratic family in Bern (1793–96). During this period he composed the text which has become known as the "Life of Jesus" and a book-length manuscript entitled "The Positivity of the Christian Religion". His relations with his employers having become strained, Hegel gladly accepted an offer mediated by Hölderlin to take up a similar position with a wine merchant's family in Frankfurt, where he moved in 1797. Here Hölderlin exerted an important influence on Hegel's thought.[6] While in Frankfurt Hegel composed the essay "Fragments on Religion and Love". In 1799 he wrote another essay entitled "The Spirit of Christianity and Its Fate" which was not published during his lifetime.
[edit]Career years
[edit]Jena, Bamberg and Nuremberg: 1801-1816
In 1801 Hegel came to Jena with the encouragement of his old friend Schelling, who was Extraordinary Professor at the University there. Hegel secured a position at the University as a Privatdozent (unsalaried lecturer) after submitting a Habilitationsschrift (dissertation) on the orbits of the planets. Later in the year Hegel's first book, The Difference Between Fichte's and Schelling's Systems of Philosophy, appeared. He lectured on "Logic and Metaphysics" and, with Schelling, gave joint lectures on an "Introduction to the Idea and Limits of True Philosophy" and held a "Philosophical Disputorium". In 1802 Schelling and Hegel founded a journal, the Kritische Journal der Philosophie ("Critical Journal of Philosophy") to which they each contributed pieces until the collaboration was ended by Schelling's departure for Würzburg in 1803.
In 1805 the University promoted Hegel to the position of Extraordinary Professor (unsalaried), after Hegel wrote a letter to the poet and minister of culture Johann Wolfgang von Goethe protesting at the promotion of his philosophical adversary Jakob Friedrich Fries ahead of him.[7] Hegel attempted to enlist the help of the poet and translator Johann Heinrich Voß to obtain a post at the newly renascent University of Heidelberg, but failed; to his chagrin, Fries was later in the same year made Ordinary Professor (salaried) there.[8]
His finances drying up quickly, Hegel was now under great pressure to deliver his book, the long-promised introduction to his System. Hegel was putting the finishing touches to this book, now called the Phenomenology of Spirit, as Napoleon engaged Prussian troops on October 14, 1806, in the Battle of Jena on a plateau outside the city. On the day before the battle, Napoleon entered the city of Jena. Hegel recounted his impressions in a letter to his friend Friedrich Immanuel Niethammer:
“I saw the Emperor – this world-soul – riding out of the city on reconnaissance. It is indeed a wonderful sensation to see such an individual, who, concentrated here at a single point, astride a horse, reaches out over the world and masters it . . . this extraordinary man, whom it is impossible not to admire.”[9]
Although Napoleon chose not to close down Jena as he had other universities, the city was devastated and students deserted the university in droves, making Hegel's financial prospects even worse. The following February Hegel's landlady Christiana Burkhardt (who had been abandoned by her husband) gave birth to their son Georg Ludwig Friedrich Fischer (1807–31).[10]
In March 1807, aged 37, Hegel moved to Bamberg, where Niethammer had declined and passed on to Hegel an offer to become editor of a newspaper, the Bamberger Zeitung. Hegel, unable to find more suitable employment, reluctantly accepted. Ludwig Fischer and his mother (whom Hegel may have offered to marry following the death of her husband) stayed behind in Jena.[11]
He was then, in November 1808, again through Niethammer, appointed headmaster of a Gymnasium in Nuremberg, a post he held until 1816. While in Nuremberg Hegel adapted his recently published Phenomenology of Mind for use in the classroom. Part of his remit being to teach a class called "Introduction to Knowledge of the Universal Coherence of the Sciences", Hegel developed the idea of an encyclopedia of the philosophical sciences, falling into three parts (logic, philosophy of nature, and philosophy of spirit).[12]
Hegel married Marie Helena Susanna von Tucher (1791–1855), the eldest daughter of a Senator, in 1811. This period saw the publication of his second major work, the Science of Logic (Wissenschaft der Logik; 3 vols., 1812, 1813, 1816), and the birth of his two legitimate sons, Karl Friedrich Wilhelm (1813–1901) and Immanuel Thomas Christian (1814–1891).
[edit]Heidelberg and Berlin: 1816-1831
Having received offers of a post from the Universities of Erlangen, Berlin, and Heidelberg, Hegel chose Heidelberg, where he moved in 1816. Soon after, in April 1817, his illegitimate son Ludwig Fischer (now ten years old) joined the Hegel household, having thus far spent his childhood in an orphanage.[13] (Ludwig's mother had died in the meantime.)[14]
Hegel published The Encyclopedia of the Philosophical Sciences in Outline (1817) as a summary of his philosophy for students attending his lectures at Heidelberg.
In 1818 Hegel accepted the renewed offer of the chair of philosophy at the University of Berlin, which had remained vacant since Fichte's death in 1814. Here he published his Philosophy of Right (1821). Hegel devoted himself primarily to delivering his lectures; his lecture courses on aesthetics, the philosophy of religion, the philosophy of history, and the history of philosophy were published posthumously from lecture notes taken by his students. His fame spread and his lectures attracted students from all over Germany and beyond.
Hegel was appointed Rector of the University in 1830, when he was 60. He was deeply disturbed by the riots for reform in Berlin in that year. In 1831 Frederick William III decorated him for his service to the Prussian state. In August 1831 a cholera epidemic reached Berlin and Hegel left the city, taking up lodgings in Kreuzberg. Now in a weak state of health, Hegel seldom went out. As the new semester began in October, Hegel returned to Berlin, with the (mistaken) impression that the epidemic had largely subsided. By November 14 Hegel was dead. The physicians pronounced the cause of death as cholera, but it is likely he died from a different gastrointestinal disease.[15] He is said to have uttered the last words "And he didn't understand me" before expiring.[16] In accordance with his wishes, Hegel was buried on November 16 in the Dorotheenstadt cemetery next to Fichte and Solger.
Hegel's son Ludwig Fischer had died shortly before while serving with the Dutch army in Batavia; the news of his death never reached his father.[17] Early the following year Hegel's sister Christiane committed suicide by drowning. Hegel's sons Karl, who became a historian, and Immanuel, who followed a theological path, lived long lives during which they safeguarded their father's Nachlaß and produced editions of his works.
[edit]Works
Hegel published only four books during his lifetime: the Phenomenology of Spirit (or Phenomenology of Mind), his account of the evolution of consciousness from sense-perception to absolute knowledge, published in 1807; the Science of Logic, the logical and metaphysical core of his philosophy, in three volumes, published in 1811, 1812, and 1816 (revised 1831); Encyclopedia of the Philosophical Sciences, a summary of his entire philosophical system, which was originally published in 1816 and revised in 1827 and 1830; and the Elements of the Philosophy of Right, his political philosophy, published in 1822. In the latter, he criticized von Haller's reactionary work, which claimed that laws were not necessary. He also published some articles early in his career and during his Berlin period. A number of other works on the philosophy of history, religion, aesthetics, and the history of philosophy were compiled from the lecture notes of his students and published posthumously.
The French Revolution for Hegel constitutes the introduction of real individual political freedom into European societies for the first time in recorded history. But precisely because of its absolute novelty, it is also unlimited with regard to everything that preceded it: on the one hand the upsurge of violence required to carry out the revolution cannot cease to be itself, while on the other, it has already consumed its opponent. The revolution therefore has nowhere to turn but onto its own result: the hard-won freedom is consumed by a brutal Reign of Terror. History, however, progresses by learning from its mistakes: only after and precisely because of this experience can one posit the existence of a constitutional state of free citizens, embodying both the benevolent organizing power of rational government and the revolutionary ideals of freedom and equality. Hegel's remarks on the French revolution led German poet Heinrich Heine to label him "The Orléans of German Philosophy".
[edit]Thought
[edit]Freedom
Hegel's thinking can be understood as a constructive development within the broad tradition that includes Plato and Kant. To this list one could add Proclus, Meister Eckhart, Leibniz, Plotinus, Jakob Boehme, and Rousseau. What all these thinkers share, which distinguishes them from materialists like Epicurus, the Stoics, and Thomas Hobbes, and from empiricists like David Hume, is that they regard freedom or self-determination both as real and as having important ontological implications, for soul or mind or divinity. This focus on freedom is what generates Plato's notion (in the Phaedo, Republic, and Timaeus) of the soul as having a higher or fuller kind of reality than inanimate objects possess. While Aristotle criticizes Plato's "Forms", he preserves Plato's cornerstones of the ontological implications for self-determination: ethical reasoning, the soul's pinnacle in the hierarchy of nature, the order of the cosmos, and an assumption with reasoned arguments for a prime mover. Plato's high esteem of individual sovereignty Kant imports to his considerations of moral and noumenal freedom, and God. All three find common ground on the unique position of humans in the scheme of things, known by the discussed categorical differences from animals and inanimate objects.
In his discussion of "Spirit" in his Encyclopedia, Hegel praises Aristotle's On the Soul as "by far the most admirable, perhaps even the sole, work of philosophical value on this topic".[18] In his Phenomenology of Spirit and his Science of Logic, Hegel's concern with Kantian topics such as freedom and morality, and with their ontological implications, is pervasive. Rather than simply rejecting Kant's dualism of freedom versus nature, Hegel aims to subsume it within "true infinity", the "Concept" (or "Notion": Begriff), "Spirit", and "ethical life" in such a way that the Kantian duality is rendered intelligible, rather than remaining a brute "given."
The reason why this subsumption takes place in a series of concepts is that Hegel's method, in his Science of Logic and his Encyclopedia, is to begin with ultra-basic concepts like Being and Nothing, and to develop these through a long sequence of elaborations, including those mentioned in the previous paragraph. In this manner, a solution that is reached, in principle, in the account of "true infinity" in the Science of Logic's chapter on "Quality", is repeated in new guises at later stages, all the way to "Spirit" and "ethical life", in the third volume of theEncyclopedia.
In this way, Hegel intends to defend the germ of truth in Kantian dualism against reductive or eliminative programs like those of materialism and empiricism. Like Plato, with his dualism of soul versus bodily appetites, Kant pursues the mind's ability to question its felt inclinations or appetites and to come up with a standard of "duty" (or, in Plato's case, "good") which transcends bodily restrictiveness. Hegel preserves this essential Platonic and Kantian concern in the form of infinity going beyond the finite (a process that Hegel in fact relates to "freedom" and the "ought"[19]), the universal going beyond the particular (in the Concept), and Spirit going beyond Nature. And Hegel renders these dualitiesintelligible by (ultimately) his argument in the "Quality" chapter of the "Science of Logic." The finite has to become infinite in order to achieve reality. The idea of the absolute excludes multiplicity so the subjective and objective must achieve synthesis to become whole. This is because, as Hegel suggests by his introduction of the concept of "reality",[20] what determines itself—rather than depending on its relations to other things for its essential character—is more fully "real" (following the Latin etymology of "real": more "thing-like") than what does not. Finite things don't determine themselves, because, as "finite" things, their essential character is determined by their boundaries, over against other finite things. So, in order to become "real", they must go beyond their finitude ("finitude is only as a transcending of itself"[21]).
The result of this argument is that finite and infinite—and, by extension, particular and universal, nature and freedom—don't face one another as two independent realities, but instead the latter (in each case) is the self-transcending of the former.[22] Rather than stress the distinct singularity of each factor that complements and conflicts with others—without explanation—the relationship between finite and infinite (and particular and universal, and nature and freedom) becomes intelligible as a progressively developing and self-perfecting whole.
[edit]Progress
The obscure writings of Jakob Böhme had a strong effect on Hegel. Böhme had written that the Fall of Man was a necessary stage in theevolution of the universe. This evolution was, itself, the result of God's desire for complete self-awareness. Hegel was fascinated by the works of Kant, Rousseau, and Goethe, and by the French Revolution. Modern philosophy, culture, and society seemed to Hegel fraught with contradictions and tensions, such as those between the subject and object of knowledge, mind and nature, self and Other, freedom and authority, knowledge and faith, the Enlightenment and Romanticism. Hegel's main philosophical project was to take these contradictions and tensions and interpret them as part of a comprehensive, evolving, rational unity that, in different contexts, he called "the absolute idea" or "absolute knowledge".
According to Hegel, the main characteristic of this unity was that it evolved through and manifested itself in contradiction and negation. Contradiction and negation have a dynamic quality that at every point in each domain of reality—consciousness, history, philosophy, art,nature, society—leads to further development until a rational unity is reached that preserves the contradictions as phases and sub-parts by lifting them up (Aufhebung) to a higher unity. This whole is mental because it is mind that can comprehend all of these phases and sub-parts as steps in its own process of comprehension. It is rational because the same, underlying, logical, developmental order underlies every domain of reality and is ultimately the order of self-conscious rational thought, although only in the later stages of development does it come to full self-consciousness. The rational, self-conscious whole is not a thing or being that lies outside of other existing things or minds. Rather, it comes to completion only in the philosophical comprehension of individual existing human minds who, through their own understanding, bring this developmental process to an understanding of itself.
"Mind" and "Spirit" are the common English translations of Hegel's use of the German "Geist". Some have argued that either of these terms overly "psychologize" Hegel,[citation needed] implying a kind of disembodied, solipsistic consciousness like ghost or "soul." Geist combines the meaning of spirit—as in god, ghost or mind—with an intentional force. In Hegel's early philosophy of nature (draft manuscripts written during his time at the University of Jena), Hegel's notion of "Geist" was tightly bound to the notion of "Aether" from which Hegel also derived the concepts of space and time; however in his later works (after Jena) Hegel did not explicitly use his old notion of "Aether" any more.[23]
Central to Hegel's conception of knowledge and mind (and therefore also of reality) was the notion of identity in difference, that is that mindexternalizes itself in various forms and objects that stand outside of it or opposed to it, and that, through recognizing itself in them, is "with itself" in these external manifestations, so that they are at one and the same time mind and other-than-mind. This notion of identity in difference, which is intimately bound up with his conception of contradiction and negativity, is a principal feature differentiating Hegel's thought from that of other philosophers.
[edit]Civil society
See also: Civil society
Hegel made the distinction between civil society and state in his Elements of the Philosophy of Right.[24] In this work, civil society (Hegel used the term "buergerliche Gesellschaft" though it is now referred to as Zivilgesellschaft in German to emphasize a more inclusive community) was a stage on the dialectical relationship between Hegel's perceived opposites, the macro-community of the state and the micro-community of the family.[25] Broadly speaking, the term was split, like Hegel's followers, to the political left and right. On the left, it became the foundation for Karl Marx's civil society as an economic base;[26] to the right, it became a description for all non-state aspects of society, including culture, society and politics.[27] This liberal distinction between political society and civil society was followed by Alexis de Tocqueville.[26]
[edit]Heraclitus
According to Hegel, "Heraclitus is the one who first declared the nature of the infinite and first grasped nature as in itself infinite, that is, its essence as process. The origin of philosophy is to be dated from Heraclitus. His is the persistent Idea that is the same in all philosophers up to the present day, as it was the Idea of Plato and Aristotle."[28] For Hegel, Heraclitus's great achievements were to have understood the nature of the infinite, which for Hegel includes understanding the inherent contradictoriness and negativity of reality, and to have grasped that reality is becoming or process, and that "being" and "nothingness" are mere empty abstractions. According to Hegel, Heraclitus's "obscurity" comes from his being a true (in Hegel's terms "speculative") philosopher who grasped the ultimate philosophical truth and therefore expressed himself in a way that goes beyond the abstract and limited nature of common sense and is difficult to grasp by those who operate within common sense. Hegel asserted that in Heraclitus he had an antecedent for his logic: "... there is no proposition of Heraclitus which I have not adopted in my logic."[29]
Hegel cites a number of fragments of Heraclitus in his Lectures on the History of Philosophy.[30] One to which he attributes great significance is the fragment he translates as "Being is not more than Non-being", which he interprets to mean
Sein und Nichts sei dasselbe
Being and non-being are the same.
Heraclitus does not form any abstract nouns from his ordinary use of "to be" and "to become" and in that fragment seems to be opposing any identity A to any other identity B, C, etc., which is not-A. Hegel, however, interprets not-A as not existing at all, not nothing at all, which cannot be conceived, but indeterminate or "pure" being without particularity or specificity.[31] Pure being and pure non-being or nothingness are for Hegel pure abstractions from the reality of becoming, and this is also how he interprets Heraclitus. This interpretation of Heraclitus cannot be ruled out, but even if present is not the main gist of his thought.
For Hegel, the inner movement of reality is the process of God thinking as manifested in the evolution of the universe of nature and thought; that is, Hegel argued that, when fully and properly understood, reality is being thought by God as manifested in man's comprehension of this process in and through philosophy. Since man's thought is the image and fulfillment of God's thought, God is not ineffable (so incomprehensible as to be unutterable) but can be understood by an analysis of thought and reality. Just as man continually corrects his concepts of reality through a dialectical process so God himself becomes more fully manifested through the dialectical process of becoming.
For his god Hegel does not take the logos of Heraclitus but refers rather to the nous of Anaxagoras, although he may well have regarded them the same, as he continues to refer to god's plan, which is identical to God. Whatever the nous thinks at any time is actual substanceand is identical to limited being, but more remains to be thought in the substrate of non-being, which is identical to pure or unlimited thought.
The universe as becoming is therefore a combination of being and non-being. The particular is never complete in itself but to find completion is continually transformed into more comprehensive, complex, self-relating particulars. The essential nature of being-for-itself is that it is free "in itself"; that is, it does not depend on anything else, such as matter, for its being. The limitations represent fetters, which it must constantly be casting off as it becomes freer and more self-determining.[32]
Although Hegel began his philosophizing with commentary on the Christian religion and often expresses the view that he is a Christian, his ideas of God are not at home among some Christians, although he has had a major influence on 19th- and 20th-century theology. At the same time, an atheistic version of his thought was adopted instead by some Marxists, who, stripping away the concepts of divinity, styled what was left dialectical materialism, which some saw as originating in Heraclitus.
[edit]Religion
Hegel's thoughts on the person of Jesus Christ stood out from the theologies of the Enlightenment. In his posthumous book, The Christian Religion: Lectures on Philosophy of Religion Part 3, he espouses that, "God is not an abstraction but a concrete God...God, considered in terms of his eternal Idea, has to generate the Son, has to distinguish himself from himself; he is the process of differentiating, namely, love and Spirit". This means that Jesus as the Son of God is posited by God over against himself as other. Hegel sees both a relational unity and a metaphysical unity between Jesus and God the Father. To Hegel, Jesus is both divine and Human. Hegel further attests that God (as Jesus) not only died, but "...rather, a reversal takes place: God, that is to say, maintains himself in the process, and the latter is only the death of death. God rises again to life, and thus things are reversed." Hegel therefore maintains not only the deity of Jesus, but the resurrection as a reality.
[edit]Legacy
See also: Hegelianism
There are views of Hegel's thought as a representation of the summit of early 19th century Germany's movement of philosophical idealism. It would come to have a profound impact on many future philosophical schools, including schools that opposed Hegel's specific dialectical idealism, such as Existentialism, the historical materialism of Karl Marx, historicism, and British Idealism.
Hegel's influence was immense both within philosophy and in the other sciences. Throughout the 19th century many chairs of philosophy around Europe were held by Hegelians, and Kierkegaard, Feuerbach, Marx, and Engels--among many others—were all deeply influenced by, but also strongly opposed to, many of the central themes of Hegel's philosophy. After less than a generation, Hegel's philosophy was suppressed and even banned by the Prussian right-wing, and was firmly rejected by the left-wing in multiple official writings.
After the period of Bruno Bauer, Hegel's influence did not make itself felt again until the philosophy of British Idealism and the 20th century Hegelian Western Marxism that began with Georg Lukács. The more recent movement of communitarianism has a strong Hegelian influence.
[edit]Reading Hegel
Some of Hegel's writing was intended for those with advanced knowledge of philosophy, although his "Encyclopedia" was intended as atextbook in a university course. Nevertheless, like many philosophers, Hegel assumed that his readers would be well-versed in Western philosophy, up to and including Descartes, Hume, Kant, Fichte, and Schelling. For those wishing to read his work without this background, introductions to and commentaries about Hegel can contribute to comprehension, although the reader is faced with multiple interpretations of Hegel's writings from incompatible schools of philosophy. The German philosopher Theodor W. Adorno devoted an essay to the difficulty of reading Hegel and asserted that there are certain passages where it is impossible to decipher what Hegel meant. Difficulties within Hegel's language and thought are magnified for those reading Hegel in translation, since his philosophical language and terminology in German often do not have direct analogues in other languages. For example, the German word "Geist" has connotations of both "mind" and "spirit" in English. English translators have to use the "phenomenology of mind" or "the phenomenology of spirit" to render Hegel's "Phaenomenologie des Geistes", thus altering the original meaning. Hegel himself argued, in his "Science of Logic", that the German language was particularly conducive to philosophical thought and writing.
One especially difficult aspect of Hegel's work is his innovation in logic. In response to Immanuel Kant's challenge to the limits of pure reason, Hegel developed a radically new form of logic, which he called speculation, and which is today popularly called dialectics. The difficulty in reading Hegel was perceived in Hegel's own day, and persists into the 21st century. To understand Hegel fully requires paying attention to his critique of standard logic, such as the law of contradiction and the law of the excluded middle. Many philosophers who came after Hegel and were influenced by him, whether adopting or rejecting his ideas, did so without fully absorbing his new speculative or dialectical logic.[citation needed]
If one wanted to provide a big piece of the Hegel puzzle to the beginner, one might present the following statement from Part One of theEncyclopedia of Philosophical Sciences: The Logic:
... a much misunderstood phenomenon in the history of philosophy — the refutation of one system by another, of an earlier by a later. Most commonly the refutation is taken in a purely negative sense to mean that the system refuted has ceased to count for anything, has been set aside and done for. Were it so, the history of philosophy would be, of all studies, most saddening, displaying, as it does, the refutation of every system which time has brought forth. Now although it may be admitted that every philosophy has been refuted, it must be in an equal degree maintained that no philosophy has been refuted. And that in two ways. For first, every philosophy that deserves the name always embodies the Idea: and secondly, every system represents one particular factor or particular stage in the evolution of the Idea. The refutation of a philosophy, therefore, only means that its barriers are crossed, and its special principle reduced to a factor in the completer principle that follows.
[edit]Left and Right Hegelianism
Some historians have spoken of Hegel's influence as represented by two opposing camps. The Right Hegelians, the allegedly direct disciples of Hegel at the Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität, advocated a Protestant orthodoxy and the political conservatism of the post-NapoleonRestoration period. The Left Hegelians, also known as the Young Hegelians, interpreted Hegel in a revolutionary sense, leading to an advocation of atheism in religion and liberal democracy in politics.
In more recent studies, however, this paradigm has been questioned.[33] No Hegelians of the period ever referred to themselves as "Right Hegelians"; that was a term of insult originated by David Strauss, a self-styled Left Hegelian. Critiques of Hegel offered from the Left Hegelians radically diverted Hegel's thinking into new directions and eventually came to form a disproportionately large part of the literature on and about Hegel.[citation needed]
The Left Hegelians also spawned Marxism, which inspired global movements, encompassing the Russian Revolution, the Chinese Revolution, and myriad revolutionary practices up until the present moment.
Twentieth-century interpretations of Hegel were mostly shaped by British Idealism, logical positivism, Marxism, and Fascism. The Italian Fascist Giovanni Gentile, according to Benedetto Croce, "...holds the honor of having been the most rigorous neo-Hegelian in the entire history of Western philosophy and the dishonor of having been the official philosopher of Fascism in Italy."[34] However, since the fall of theUSSR, a new wave of Hegel scholarship arose in the West, without the preconceptions of the prior schools of thought. Walter Jaeschke andOtto Pöggeler in Germany, as well as Peter Hodgson and Howard Kainz in America are notable for their recent contributions to post-USSR thinking about Hegel.
[edit]Triads
In previous modern accounts of Hegelianism (to undergraduate classes, for example), especially those formed prior to the Hegel renaissance, Hegel's dialectic was most often characterized as a three-step process, "thesis, antithesis, synthesis"; namely, that a "thesis" (e.g. theFrench Revolution) would cause the creation of its "antithesis" (e.g. the Reign of Terror that followed), and would eventually result in a "synthesis" (e.g. the Constitutional state of free citizens). However, Hegel used this classification only once, and he attributed the terminology to Immanuel Kant. The terminology was largely developed earlier by Johann Fichte. It was spread by Heinrich Moritz Chalybäus in a popular account of Hegelian philosophy, and since then the misfit terms have stuck[citation needed]. What is wrong with the "thesis-antithesis-synthesis" approach is that it gives the sense that things or ideas are contradicted or opposed by things that come from outside them. To the contrary, the fundamental notion of Hegel's dialectic is that things or ideas have internal contradictions. From Hegel's point of view, analysis or comprehension of a thing or idea reveals that underneath its apparently simple identity or unity is an underlying inner contradiction. This contradiction leads to the dissolution of the thing or idea in the simple form in which it presented itself and to a higher-level, more complex thing or idea that more adequately incorporates the contradiction. The triadic form that appears in many places in Hegel (e.g. being-nothingness-becoming, immediate-mediate-concrete, abstract-negative-concrete) is about this movement from inner contradiction to higher-level integration or unification.
Believing that the traditional description of Hegel's philosophy in terms of thesis-antithesis-synthesis was mistaken, a few scholars, like Raya Dunayevskaya, a devout Marxist who was once Leon Trotsky's secretary, have attempted to discard the triadic approach altogether. According to their argument, although Hegel refers to "the two elemental considerations: first, the idea of freedom as the absolute and final aim; secondly, the means for realising it, i.e. the subjective side of knowledge and will, with its life, movement, and activity" (thesis and antithesis) he doesn't use "synthesis" but instead speaks of the "Whole": "We then recognised the State as the moral Whole and the Reality of Freedom, and consequently as the objective unity of these two elements." Furthermore, in Hegel's language, the "dialectical" aspect or "moment" of thought and reality, by which things or thoughts turn into their opposites or have their inner contradictions brought to the surface, what he called "aufhebung", is only preliminary to the "speculative" (and not "synthesizing") aspect or "moment", which grasps the unity of these opposites or contradiction. Thus for Hegel, reason is ultimately "speculative", not "dialectical".
It is widely admitted today "[35] that the old-fashioned description of Hegel's philosophy in terms of "thesis-antithesis-synthesis" is inaccurate. Nevertheless, such is the persistence of this misnomer that the model and terminology survive in a number of scholarly works.
[edit]Renaissance
In the latter half of the 20th century, Hegel's philosophy underwent a major renaissance. This was due to: (a) the rediscovery and reevaluation of Hegel as a possible philosophical progenitor of Marxism by philosophically oriented Marxists; (b) a resurgence of the historical perspective that Hegel brought to everything; and (c) an increasing recognition of the importance of his dialectical method. The book that did the most to reintroduce Hegel into the Marxist canon was perhaps Georg Lukács' History and Class Consciousness. This sparked a renewed interest in Hegel reflected in the work of Herbert Marcuse, Theodor W. Adorno, Ernst Bloch, Raya Dunayevskaya, Alexandre Kojève and Gotthard Günther among others. The Hegel renaissance also highlighted the significance of Hegel's early works, i.e. those published prior to thePhenomenology of Spirit. The direct and indirect influence of Kojève's lectures and writings (on the Phenomenology of Spirit, in particular) mean that it is not possible to understand most French philosophers from Jean-Paul Sartre to Jacques Derrida without understanding Hegel.[citation needed]
Beginning in the 1960s, Anglo-American Hegel scholarship has attempted to challenge the traditional interpretation of Hegel as offering a metaphysical system: this has also been the approach of Z.A. Pelczynski and Shlomo Avineri. This view, sometimes referred to as the 'non-metaphysical option', has had a decided influence on many major English language studies of Hegel in the past 40 years. U.S.neoconservative political theorist Francis Fukuyama's controversial book The End of History and the Last Man was heavily influenced by Alexandre Kojève. Among modern scientists, the physicist David Bohm, the mathematician William Lawvere, the logician Kurt Gödel and the biologist Ernst Mayr have been interested in Hegel's philosophical work.[citation needed]
A late 20th century literature in Western Theology that is friendly to Hegel includes such writers as Dale M. Schlitt (1984), Theodore Geraets(1985), Philip M. Merklinger (1991), Stephen Rocker (1995) and Cyril O'Regan (1995). The contemporary theologian Hans Küng has also advanced contemporary scholarship in Hegel studies.
Recently, two prominent American philosophers, John McDowell and Robert Brandom (sometimes, half-seriously, referred to as thePittsburgh Hegelians), have produced philosophical works exhibiting a marked Hegelian influence. Each is avowedly influenced by the lateWilfred Sellars, also of Pittsburgh, who referred to his seminal work, Empiricism and the Philosophy of Mind, as a series of "incipientMéditations Hegeliennes" (in homage to Edmund Husserl's treatise, Meditations Cartesiennes).
Beginning in the 1990s, after the fall of the USSR, a fresh reading of Hegel took place in the West. For these scholars, fairly well represented by the Hegel Society of America and in cooperation with German scholars such as Otto Pöggeler and Walter Jaeschke, Hegel's works should be read without preconceptions. Marx plays a minor role in these new readings, and some contemporary scholars have suggested that Marx's interpretation of Hegel is irrelevant to a proper reading of Hegel. Some American philosophers associated with this movement include Clark Butler, Vince Hathaway, Daniel Shannon, David Duquette, David MacGregor, Edward Beach, John Burbidge, Lawrence Stepelevich, Rudolph Siebert, Randall Jackwak, Theodore Geraets and William Desmond.
[edit]Criticism
Criticism of Hegel has been widespread in the 19th and the 20th centuries; a diverse range of individuals including Arthur Schopenhauer, Karl Marx, Søren Kierkegaard, Friedrich Nietzsche, Bertrand Russell, G. E. Moore, Eric Voegelin and A. J. Ayer have challenged Hegelian philosophy from a variety of perspectives. Among the first to take a critical view of Hegel's system was the 19th Century German group known as the Young Hegelians, which included Ludwig Feuerbach, Karl Marx, Friedrich Engels, and their followers. In Britain, the Hegelian British Idealism school (members of which included Francis Herbert Bradley, Bernard Bosanquet, and, in the United States, Josiah Royce) was challenged and rejected by analytic philosophers G. E. Moore and Bertrand Russell; Russell, in particular, considered "almost all" of Hegel's doctrines to be false.[36] Logical positivists such as Alfred Jules Ayer and the Vienna Circle also criticized Hegelian philosophy and its supporters, such as F. H. Bradley.
Hegel's contemporary Schopenhauer was particularly critical, and wrote of Hegel's philosophy as "a pseudo-philosophy paralyzing all mental powers, stifling all real thinking" [37] Kierkegaard criticized Hegel's 'absolute knowledge' unity [38] Scientist Ludwig Boltzmann also criticized the obscure complexity of Hegel's works, referring to Hegel's writing as an "unclear thoughtless flow of words".[39] Bertrand Russell stated that Hegel was "the hardest to understand of all the great philosophers" in his Unpopular Essays and A History of Western Philosophy.
Karl Popper makes the claim in the second volume of The Open Society and Its Enemies that Hegel's system formed a thinly veiled justification for the absolute rule of Frederick William III, and that Hegel's idea of the ultimate goal of history was to reach a state approximating that of 1830s Prussia. Popper further proposed that Hegel's philosophy served not only as an inspiration for communist andfascist totalitarian governments of the 20th century, whose dialectics allow for any belief to be construed as rational simply if it could be said to exist. This view of Hegel as an apologist of state power and precursor of 20th century totalitarianism was criticized by Herbert Marcuse in his Reason and Revolution: Hegel and the Rise of Social Theory, on the grounds that Hegel was not an apologist for any state or form of authority simply because it existed: for Hegel the state must always be rational. Other scholars, e.g. Walter Kaufmann and Shlomo Avineri, have also criticized Popper's theories about Hegel.[40] Isaiah Berlin listed Hegel as one of the six architects of modern authoritarianism who undermined liberal democracy, along with Rousseau, Helvetius, Fichte, Saint-Simon, and Maistre.[41]
[edit]Selected works
Main article: Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel bibliography
[edit]Published during Hegel's lifetime
§ Differenz des Fichteschen und Schellingschen Systems der Philosophie, 1801
The Difference Between Fichte's and Schelling's Systems of Philosophy, tr. H. S. Harris and Walter Cerf, 1977
§ The German Constitution, 1802
§ Phänomenologie des Geistes, 1807
Phenomenology of Mind, tr. J. B. Baillie, 1910; 2nd ed. 1931
Hegel's Phenomenology of Spirit, tr. A. V. Miller, 1977
Phenomenology of Spirit, translated by Terry Pinkard, 2010
§ Wissenschaft der Logik, 1812, 1813, 1816
Science of Logic, tr. W. H. Johnston and L. G. Struthers, 2 vols., 1929; tr. A. V. Miller, 1969; tr. George di Giovanni, 2010
§ Enzyklopädie der philosophischen Wissenschaften, 1817; 2nd ed. 1827; 3rd ed. 1830 (Encyclopedia of the Philosophical Sciences)
(Pt. I:) The Logic of Hegel, tr. William Wallace, 1874, 2nd ed. 1892; tr. T. F. Geraets, W. A. Suchting and H. S. Harris, 1991; tr. Klaus Brinkmann and Daniel O. Dahlstrom 2010
(Pt. II:) Hegel's Philosophy of Nature, tr. A. V. Miller, 1970
(Pt. III:) Hegel's Philosophy of Mind, tr. William Wallace, 1894; rev. by A. V. Miller, 1971
§ Grundlinien der Philosophie des Rechts, 1821
Elements of the Philosophy of Right, tr. T. M. Knox, 1942; tr. H. B. Nisbet, ed. Allen W. Wood, 1991
[edit]Published posthumously
§ Lectures on the Philosophy of History (also translated as Lectures on the Philosophy of World History) 1837
§ Lectures on Philosophy of Religion
§ Lectures on the History of Philosophy
[edit]Secondary literature
[edit]General introductions
§ Francke, Kuno, Howard, William Guild, Schiller, Friedrich, 1913-1914 "The German classics of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries:masterpieces of German literature translated into English Vol 7, Jay Lowenberg, The Life of Georg Wilhelm Freidrich Hegel". Retrieved 2010-09-24.
§ Beiser, Frederick C., 2005. Hegel. Routledge
§ Findlay, J. N., 1958. Hegel: A Re-examination. Oxford University Press. ISBN 0-19-519879-4
§ Gouin, Jean-Luc, 2000. Hegel ou de la Raison intégrale, suivi de : « Aimer Penser Mourir : Hegel, Nietzsche, Freud en miroirs », Montréal (Québec), Éditions Bellarmin, 225 p. ISBN 2-89007-883-3
§ Houlgate, Stephen, 2005. An Introduction to Hegel. Freedom, Truth and History. Oxford: Blackwell
§ Kainz, Howard P., 1996. G. W. F. Hegel. Ohio University Press. ISBN 0-8214-1231-0.
§ Kaufmann, Walter, 1965. Hegel: A Reinterpretation. New York: Doubleday (reissued Notre Dame IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 1978)
§ Plant, Raymond, 1983. Hegel: An Introduction. Oxford: Blackwell
§ Singer, Peter, 2001. Hegel: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford University Press (previously issued in the OUP Past Masters series, 1983)
§ Stirling, James Hutchison, The Secret of Hegel: Being the Hegelian System in Origin Principle, Form and Matter
§ Taylor, Charles, 1975. Hegel. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-29199-2. A comprehensive exposition of Hegel's thought and its impact on the central intellectual and spiritual issues of his and our time.
§ Scruton, Roger, "Understanding Hegel" in The Philosopher on Dover Beach, Manchester: Carcanet Press, 1990. ISBN 0-85635-857-6
[edit]Essays
§ Beiser, Frederick C. (ed.), 1993. The Cambridge Companion to Hegel. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-38711-6. A collection of articles covering the range of Hegel's thought.
§ Adorno, Theodor W., 1994. Hegel: Three Studies. MIT Press. Translated by Shierry M. Nicholsen, with an introduction by Nicholsen and Jeremy J. Shapiro, ISBN 0-262-51080-4. Essays on Hegel's concept of spirit/mind, Hegel's concept of experience, and why Hegel is difficult to read.
[edit]Biography
§ Althaus, Horst, 1992. Hegel und die heroischen Jahre der Philosophie. Munich: Carl Hanser Verlag. Eng. tr. Michael Tarsh as Hegel: An Intellectual Biography, Cambridge: Polity Press, 2000
§ Pinkard, Terry P., 2000. Hegel: A Biography. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-49679-9. By a leading American Hegel scholar; aims to debunk popular misconceptions about Hegel's thought.
§ Rosenkranz, Karl, 1844. Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegels Leben. Still an important source for Hegel's life.
§ Hondt, Jacques d', 1998. Hegel: Biographie. Calmann-Lévy /// Recension (2009) de cette biographie en tandem avec celle de Horst Althaus (1999), parue dans la revue Nuit Blanche : Le Commissaire et le Détective
[edit]Historical
§ Rockmore, Tom, 1993. Before and After Hegel: A Historical Introduction to Hegel's Thought. Indianapolis: Hackett. ISBN 0-87220-648-3.
§ Löwith, Karl, 1964. From Hegel to Nietzsche: The Revolution in Nineteenth-Century Thought. Translated by David E. Green. New York: Columbia University Press.
[edit]Hegel's development
§ Lukács, Georg, 1948. Der junge Hegel. Zürich and Vienna (2nd ed. Berlin, 1954). Eng. tr. Rodney Livingstone as The Young Hegel, London: Merlin Press, 1975. ISBN 0-262-12070-4
§ Harris, H. S., 1972. Hegel's Development: Towards the Sunlight 1770-1801. Oxford: Clarendon Press
§ Harris, H. S., 1983. Hegel's Development: Night Thoughts (Jena 1801-1806). Oxford: Clarendon Press
§ Dilthey, Wilhelm, 1906. Die Jugendgeschichte Hegels (repr. in Gesammelte Schriften, 1959, vol. IV)
§ Haering, Theodor L., 1929, 1938. Hegel: sein Wollen und sein Werk, 2 vols. Leipzig (repr. Aalen: Scientia Verlag, 1963)
[edit]Recent English-language literature
§ Inwood, Michael, 1983. Hegel. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul (Arguments of the Philosophers)
§ Rockmore, Tom, 1986. Hegel's Circular Epistemology. Indiana University Press
§ Pinkard, Terry P., 1988. Hegel's Dialectic: The Explanation of Possibility. Temple University Press
§ Westphal, Kenneth, 1989. Hegel's Epistemological Realism. Kluwer Academic Publishers
§ Forster, Michael N., 1989. Hegel and Skepticism. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press. ISBN 0-674-38707-4
§ Pippin, Robert B., 1989. Hegel's Idealism: the Satisfactions of Self-Consciousness. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-37923-7.Advocates a stronger continuity between Hegel and Kant.
§ Maker, William, 1994. Philosophy Without Foundations: Rethinking Hegel. State University of New York Press. ISBN 0-7914-2100-7.
§ Winfield, Richard Dien, 1989. Overcoming Foundations: Studies in Systematic Philosophy. Columbia University Press. ISBN 0-231-07008-X.
§ Laitinen, Arto & Sandis,Constantine (eds.), 2010. Hegel on Action. Palgrave Macmillan.
[edit]Phenomenology of Spirit
See also: The Phenomenology of Spirit
§ Stern, Robert, 2002. Hegel and the Phenomenology of Spirit. Routledge. ISBN 0-415-21788-1. An introduction for students.
§ Cohen, Joseph, 2007. Le sacrifice de Hegel. (In French language). Paris, Galilée. An extensive study of the question of sacrifice in Hegel's Phenomenology of Spirit.
§ Braver, Lee. A Thing of This World: a History of Continental Anti-Realism. Northwestern University Press: 2007. ISBN 978-0-8101-2380-9This study covers Hegel's Phenomenology and its contribution to the history of Continental Anti-Realism.
§ Doull, James (2000). "Hegel's "Phenomenology" and Postmodern Thought". Animus 5. ISSN 1209-0689. Retrieved August 9, 2011.
§ Doull, James; Jackson, F.L. (2003). "The Idea of a Phenomenology of Spirit". Animus 8. ISSN 1209-0689. Retrieved August 17, 2011.
§ Hyppolite, Jean, 1946. Genèse et structure de la Phénoménologie de l'esprit. Paris: Aubier. Eng. tr. Samuel Cherniak and John Heckman as Genesis and Structure of Hegel's "Phenomenology of Spirit", Evanston: Northwestern University Press, 1979. ISBN 0-8101-0594-2. A classic commentary.
§ Kojève, Alexandre, 1947. Introduction à la lecture de Hegel. Paris: Gallimard. Eng. tr. James H. Nichols, Jr., as Introduction to the Reading of Hegel: Lectures on the Phenomenology of Spirit, Basic Books, 1969. ISBN 0-8014-9203-3 Influential European reading of Hegel.
§ Solomon, Robert C., 1983. In the Spirit of Hegel. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
§ Harris, H. S., 1995. Hegel: Phenomenology and System. Indianapolis: Hackett. A distillation of the author's monumental two-volume commentaryHegel's Ladder.
§ Westphal, Kenneth R., 2003. Hegel's Epistemology: A Philosophical Introduction to the Phenomenology of Spirit. Indianapolis: Hackett.ISBN 0-87220-645-9
§ Russon, John, 2004. Reading Hegel's Phenomenology. Indiana University Press. ISBN 0-253-21692-3.
§ Bristow, William, 2007. Hegel and the Transformation of Philosophical Critique. Oxford University Press. ISBN 0-19-929064-4
§ Kalkavage, Peter, 2007. The Logic of Desire: An Introduction to Hegel's Phenomenology of Spirit. Philadelphia: Paul Dry Books. ISBN 978-1-58988-037-5. This work provides insights on Hegel's complex work as a whole as well as serving as a sure guide for every chapter and for virtually every paragraph.
§ Scruton, Roger, "Understanding Hegel" in The Philosopher on Dover Beach, Manchester: Carcanet Press, 1990. ISBN 0-85635-857-6
[edit]Logic
See also: Science of Logic
§ Burbidge, John, 2006. The Logic of Hegel's Logic: An Introduction. Broadview Press. ISBN 1-55111-633-2
§ De Boer, Karin, 2010. On Hegel: The Sway of the Negative. Palgrave Macmillan. ISBN 0230247547
§ Hartnack, Justus, 1998. An Introduction to Hegel's Logic. Indianapolis: Hackett. ISBN 0-87220-424-3
§ Houlgate, Stephen, 2005. The Opening of Hegel's Logic: From Being to Infinity. Purdue University Press. ISBN 1-55753-257-5
§ Rinaldi, Giacomo, 1992. A History and Interpretation of the Logic of Hegel Lewiston: Edwin Mellen Press. ISBN 0-7734-9509-6
§ Schäfer, Rainer, 2001. Die Dialektik und ihre besonderen Formen in Hegels Logik. Hamburg/Meiner. ISBN 3-7873-1585-3.
§ Wallace, Robert M., 2005. Hegel's Philosophy of Reality, Freedom, and God. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-84484-3. Through a detailed analysis of Hegel's Science of Logic, Wallace shows how Hegel contributes to the broadly Platonic tradition of philosophy that includes Aristotle, Plotinus, and Kant. In the course of doing this, Wallace defends Hegel against major critiques, including the one presented by Charles Taylor in his Hegel.
§ Winfield, Richard Dien, 2006. From Concept to Objectivity: Thinking Through Hegel's Subjective Logic. Ashgate. ISBN 0-7546-5536-9.jdj
[edit]Politics
§ Avineri, Shlomo, 1974. Hegel's Theory of the Modern State. Cambridge University Press. Best introduction to Hegel's political philosophy.
§ Kierans, Kenneth (2008). "'Absolute Negativity': Community and Freedom in Hegel's Philosophy of Right". Animus 12. ISSN 1209-0689. Retrieved August 17, 2011.
§ Ritter, Joachim, 1984. Hegel and the French Revolution. MIT Press.
§ Riedel, Manfred, 1984. Between Tradition and Revolution: The Hegelian Transformation of Political Philosophy, Cambridge.
§ Marcuse, Herbert, 1941. Reason and Revolution: Hegel and the Rise of Social Theory. An introduction to the philosophy of Hegel, devoted to debunking the conception that Hegel's work included in nuce the Fascist totalitarianism of National Socialism; the negation of philosophy through historical materialism.
§ Rose, Gillian, 1981. Hegel Contra Sociology. Athlone Press. ISBN 0-485-12036-4.
§ Scruton, Roger, "Hegel as a conservative thinker" in The Philosopher on Dover Beach, Manchester: Carcanet Press, 1990. ISBN 0-85635-857-6
[edit]Republicanism
§ Moggach, Douglas. 2006. "Introduction: Hegelianism, Republicanism and Modernity", The New Hegelians edited by Douglas Moggach, Cambridge University Press.
[edit]Aesthetics
§ Bungay, Stephen, 1987. Beauty and Truth. A Study of Hegel's Aesthetics. New York.
§ Danto, Arthur Coleman, 1986. The Philosophical Disenfranchisement of Art. Columbia University Press.
§ Desmond, William, 1986. Art and the Absolute. Albany (New York).
§ Gethmann-Siefert, Annemarie, Einführung in Hegel's Ästhetik, Wilhelm Fink (German).
§ Mark Jarzombek, "The Cunning of Architecture's Reason," Footprint (#1, Autumn 2007), pp. 31–46.
§ Maker, W. (ed.), 2000. Hegel and Aesthetics. New York.
§ Olivier, Alain P., 2003. Hegel et la Musique. Paris (French).
§ Roche, Mark-William, 1998. Tragedy and Comedy. A Systematic Study and a Critique of Hegel. Albany. New York.
§ Winfield, Richard Dien, 1996. Stylistics. Rethinking the Artforms after Hegel. Albany, Suny Press.
[edit]Religion
§ Desmond, William, 2003. Hegel's God: A Counterfeit Double?. Ashgate. ISBN 0-7546-0565-5
§ O'Regan, Cyril, 1994. The Heterodox Hegel. State University of New York Press, Albany. ISBN 0-7914-2006-X. The most authoritative work to date on Hegel's philosophy of religion.
§ Cohen, Joseph, 2005. Le spectre juif de Hegel (in French language); Preface by Jean-Luc Nancy. Paris, Galilée.An extensive study of the Jewish question in Hegel's Early Theological Writings.
§ Dickey, Laurence, 1987. Hegel: Religion, Economics, and the Politics of Spirit, 1770–1807. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-33035-1. A fascinating account of how "Hegel became Hegel", using the guiding hypothesis that Hegel "was basically a theologian manqué".
§ Fackenheim, E. The Religious Dimension in Hegel's Thought. University of Chicago Press. 0226233502.
§ Rocker, Stephen, 1995. Hegel's Rational Religion: The Validity of Hegel's Argument for the Identity in Content of Absolute Religion and Absolute Philosophy. Fairleigh Dickinson University Press.
§ Andrew Shanks, Hegel and Religious Faith: Divided brain, atoning spirit (London, T & T Clark, 2011).
[edit]Hegel's reputation
§ Popper, Karl. The Open Society and Its Enemies, vol. 2: Hegel and Marx. An influential attack on Hegel.
§ Stewart, Jon, ed., 1996. The Hegel Myths and Legends. Northwestern University Press.
[edit]Comparative studies
Peter Henrici. Hegel und Blondel: Eine Untersuchung uber Form und Sinn der Dialektik in der 'Phanomenologie des Geistes' und der ersten 'Action'. Pullach bei Munchen: Berchmanskollege, 1958.
Siemens, R. (1997). The problem of modern poverty: significant congruences between Hegel's and George's theoretical conceptions. The American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 56, 617-637. (Note: A comparison between Hegel and Henry George.)
[edit]See also
§ Thesis, antithesis, synthesis
[edit]Notes
1. ^ Butler, Judith, Subjects of desire: Hegelian reflections in twentieth-century France (New York: Columbia University Press, 1987)
2. ^ "One of the few things on which the analysts, pragmatists, and existentialists agree with the dialectical theologians is that Hegel is to be repudiated: their attitude toward Kant, Aristotle, Plato, and the other great philosophers is not at all unanimous even within each movement; but opposition to Hegel is part of the platform of all four, and of the Marxists, too." Walter Kaufmann, "The Hegel Myth and Its Method", in From Shakespeare to Existentialism: Studies in Poetry, Religion, and Philosophy by Walter Kaufmann, Beacon Press, Boston 1959, page 88-119
3. ^ Pinkard, Hegel: A Biography, pp. 2-3; p. 745.
4. ^ Ibid., 3, incorrectly gives the date as September 20, 1781, and describes Hegel as aged eleven. Cf. the index to Pinkard's book and his "Chronology of Hegel's Life", which correctly give the date as 1783 (pp. 773, 745); see also German Wikipedia.
5. ^ Ibid., 4.
6. ^ Ibid., 80.
7. ^ Ibid., 223.
8. ^ Ibid., 224-5.
9. ^ Ibid., 228.
10. ^ Ibid., 192.
11. ^ Ibid., 238.
12. ^ Ibid., 337.
13. ^ Ibid., 354-5.
14. ^ Ibid., 356.
15. ^ Ibid., 658-9.
16. ^ Norman Davies, Europe: A history p. 687
17. ^ Pinkard, Hegel: A Biography, p. 548.
18. ^ par. 378
19. ^ See Science of Logic, trans. Miller [Atlantic Highlands, NJ: Humanities, 1989], pp. 133-136 and 138, top
20. ^ Ibid., 111
21. ^ Ibid., 145
22. ^ See Ibid., 146, top
23. ^ Stefan Gruner: "Hegel's Aether Doctrine", VDM Publ., 2010, ISBN 978-3-639-28451-5
24. ^ Etext of Philosophy of Right Hegel, 1827 (translated by Dyde, 1897)
25. ^ Pelczynski, A.Z.; 1984; 'The Significane of Hegel's speration of the state and civil society' pp1-13 in Pelczynski, A.Z. (ed.); 1984;The State and Civil Society; Cambridge University Press
26. ^ a b Zaleski, Pawel (2008). "Tocqueville on Civilian Society. A Romantic Vision of the Dichotomic Structure of Social Reality".Archiv für Begriffsgeschichte (Felix Meiner Verlag) 50.
27. ^ ibid
28. ^ Hegel, G. W. F.. "Vorlesungen über die Geschichte der Philosophie". pp. 336–337. Retrieved 2008-07-01.
29. ^ Hartnack, Justus; Lars Aagaard-Mogensen, Translator (1998).An Introduction to Hegel's Logic. Hackett Publishing. pp. 16–17.ISBN 0872204243. Hartnack quotes Hegel, Lectures on the History of Philosophy Volume I.
30. ^ Hegel, G. W. F.. "Vorlesungen über die Geschichte der Philosophie". pp. 319–343. Retrieved 2008-07-01.
31. ^ Copleston, Frederick Charles (2003). A History of Philosophy: Volume 7: 18th and 19th century German philosophy. Continuum International Publishing Group. Chapter X. ISBN 0826469019.
32. ^ The notable Introduction to Philosophy of History expresses the historical aspects of the dialectic.
33. ^ Karl Löwith, From Hegel to Nietzsche: The Revolution in Nineteenth-Century Thought, translated by David E. Green, New York: Columbia University Press, 1964.
34. ^ Benedetto Croce, Guide to Aesthetics, Translated by Patrick Romanell, "Translator's Introduction", The Library of Liberal Arts, The Bobbs–Merrill Co., Inc., 1965
35. ^ {{ Slavoj Žižek, The Return to Hegel | cite web | url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aR3vfHuOW38 | accessdate=2011-07-08}}
36. ^ B.Russell, History of western philosophy, pg 701 chapter 22, paragraph 1
37. ^ On the Basis of Morality
38. ^ Søren Kierkegaard Concluding Unscientific Postscriptt
39. ^ Ludwig Boltzmann, Theoretical physics and philosophical problems: Selected writings, p. 155, D. Reidel, 1974, ISBN 90-277-0250-0
40. ^ (See for instance Walter Kaufmann 1959, The Hegel Myth and Its Method)
41. ^ Berlin, Isaiah, Freedom and Betrayal: Six Enemies of Human Liberty (Princeton University Press, 2003)
[edit]Further reading
§ Beiser, F.. Hegel (The Routledge Philosophers). New York: Routledge, 2005.
§ Pinkard, Terry. Hegel: A Biography. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2000.
§ Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel entry in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
§ Hegel page in 'The History Guide'
§ Hegel.net - freely available resources (under the GNU FDL)
§ « Der Instinkt der Vernünftigkeit » and other texts - Works on Hegel in Université du Québec site (in French)
§ Hegel : On Christianity : Early Theological Writings on archive.org
§ Hegel & Haiti by Susan Buck-Morss, 2000
§ Works by or about Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel in libraries (WorldCat catalog)
§ Lowenberg J., (1913) "The Life of Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel". in German classics of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. New York: German Publication Society.
§ Hegel, as the National Philosopher of Germany (1874) Karl Rosenkranz, Granville Stanley Hall, William Torrey Harris, Gray, Baker & Co. 1874
[edit]Audio
§ Introduction to The Philosophy of History, Librivox.org
[edit]Societies
§ The Hegel Society of America
[edit]Hegel's texts online
§ Works by Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel at Project Gutenberg
§ Philosophy of History Introduction
§ Hegel's The Philosophy of Right
§ Hegel's The Philosophy of History
§ Hegel by HyperText, reference archive on Marxists.org
§ Phenomenology of Spirit. translated by Terry Pinkard
ADAM SMITH (1723-1790):
Adam Smith
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Adam Smith
Full name Adam Smith
Born 5 June 1723
Kirkcaldy, Scotland
Died 17 July 1790 (aged 67)
Edinburgh, Scotland
Era Classical economics
(Modern economics)
Region Western philosophy
Main interests Political philosophy, ethics,economics
Notable ideas Classical economics,
modern free market,
division of labour,
the "invisible hand"
Signature 
Adam Smith (baptised 16 June 1723 – died 17 July 1790 [OS: 5 June 1723 – 17 July 1790]) was a Scottish social philosopher and a pioneer of political economy. One of the key figures of the Scottish Enlightenment, Smith is the author of The Theory of Moral Sentiments and An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations. The latter, usually abbreviated as The Wealth of Nations, is considered his magnum opus and the first modern work of economics. It earned him an enormous reputation and would become one of the most influential works on economics ever published. Smith is widely cited as the father of modern economics and capitalism.
Smith studied social philosophy at the University of Glasgow and the University of Oxford. After graduating, he delivered a successful series of public lectures at Edinburgh, leading him to collaborate with David Hume during the Scottish Enlightenment. Smith obtained a professorship at Glasgow teaching moral philosophy, and during this time he wrote and published The Theory of Moral Sentiments. In his later life, he took a tutoring position that allowed him to travel throughout Europe, where he met other intellectual leaders of his day. Smith returned home and spent the next ten years writing The Wealth of Nations, publishing it in 1776. He died in 1790.
Biography
Early life
Smith was born to Margaret Douglas at Kirkcaldy, Fife, Scotland. His father, also named Adam Smith, was a lawyer, civil servant, and widower who married Margaret Douglas in 1720 and died two months before Smith was born.[1] Although the exact date of Smith's birth is unknown, his baptism was recorded on 5 June 1723 at Kirkcaldy.[2] Though few events in Smith's early childhood are known, Scottish journalist and Smith's biographer John Rae recorded that Smith was abducted by gypsies at the age of four and released when others went to rescue him.[N 1] Smith was close to his mother, who likely encouraged him to pursue his scholarly ambitions.[4] He attended the Burgh School of Kirkcaldy – characterized by Rae as "one of the best secondary schools of Scotland at that period" – from 1729 to 1737.[3] While there, Smith studied Latin, mathematics, history, and writing.[4]
Formal education
Smith entered the University of Glasgow when he was fourteen and studied moral philosophy under Francis Hutcheson.[4] Here, Smith developed his passion for liberty, reason, and free speech. In 1740, Smith was awarded the Snell exhibition and left to attend Balliol College, Oxford.[5]
Smith considered the teaching at Glasgow far superior to that at Oxford, which he found intellectually stifling.[6] In Book V, Chapter II of The Wealth of Nations, Smith wrote: "In the University of Oxford, the greater part of the public professors have, for these many years, given up altogether even the pretence of teaching." Smith is also reported to have complained to friends that Oxford officials once discovered him reading a copy of David Hume's Treatise on Human Nature, and they subsequently confiscated his book and punished him severely for reading it.[3][7][8] According to William Robert Scott, "The Oxford of [Smith's] time gave little if any help towards what was to be his lifework."[9] Nevertheless, Smith took the opportunity while at Oxford to teach himself several subjects by reading many books from the shelves of the large Oxford library.[10] When Smith was not studying on his own, his time at Oxford was not a happy one, according to his letters.[11] Near the end of his time at Oxford, Smith began suffering from shaking fits, probably the symptoms of a nervous breakdown.[12] He left Oxford University in 1746, before his scholarship ended.[12][13]
In Book V of The Wealth of Nations, Smith comments on the low quality of instruction and the meager intellectual activity at English universities, when compared to their Scottish counterparts. He attributes this both to the rich endowments of the colleges at Oxford and Cambridge, which made the income of professors independent of their ability to attract students, and to the fact that distinguished men of letters could make an even more comfortable living as ministers of the Church of England.[8]
Teaching career
Smith began delivering public lectures in 1748 in Edinburgh, sponsored by the Philosophical Society of Edinburgh under the patronage of Lord Kames.[14] His lecture topics included rhetoric and belles-lettres, and later the subject of "the progress of opulence". On this latter topic he first expounded his economic philosophy of "the obvious and simple system of natural liberty". While Smith was not adept at public speaking, his lectures met with success.[15]
In 1750, he met the philosopher David Hume, who was his senior by more than a decade. In their writings covering history, politics, philosophy, economics, and religion, Smith and Hume shared closer intellectual and personal bonds than with other important figures of the Scottish Enlightenment.[16]
In 1751, Smith earned a professorship at Glasgow University teaching logic courses, and in 1752 Smith was elected a member of the Philosophical Society of Edinburgh, having been introduced to the society by Lord Kames. When the head of Moral Philosophy died the next year, Smith took over the position.[15] He worked as an academic for the next thirteen years, which he characterized as "by far the most useful and therefore by far the happiest and most honorable period [of his life]".[17]
Smith published The Theory of Moral Sentiments in 1759, embodying some of his Glasgow lectures. This work was concerned with how human morality depends on sympathy between agent and spectator, or the individual and other members of society. Smith defined "sympathy" as the feeling of moral sentiments. He bases his explanation not on a special "moral sense", as the third Lord Shaftesbury and Hutcheson had done, nor on utility as Hume did, but on sympathy. Following the publication of The Theory of Moral Sentiments, Smith became so popular that many wealthy students left their schools in other countries to enroll at Glasgow to learn under Smith.[18] After the publication of The Theory of Moral Sentiments, Smith began to give more attention to jurisprudence and economics in his lectures and less to his theories of morals.[19] For example, Smith lectured that the cause of increase in national wealth is labor, rather than the nation's quantity of gold or silver, which is the basis for mercantilism, the economic theory that dominated Western European economic policies at the time.[18]
In 1762, the University of Glasgow conferred on Smith the title of Doctor of Laws (LL.D.). At the end of 1763, he obtained an offer from Charles Townshend – who had been introduced to Smith by David Hume – to tutor his stepson, Henry Scott, the young Duke of Buccleuch. Smith then resigned from his professorship to take the tutoring position, and he subsequently attempted to return the fees he had collected from his students because he resigned in the middle of the term, but his students refused.[20]
Tutoring and travels
Smith's tutoring job entailed touring Europe with Scott while teaching him subjects including proper Polish.[20] He was paid £300 per year plus expenses along with £300 per year pension, which was roughly twice his former income as a teacher.[20] Smith first travelled as a tutor to Toulouse, France, where he stayed for a year and a half.[20] According to accounts, he found Toulouse to be very boring, and he wrote to Hume that he "had begun to write a book to pass away the time".[20] After touring the south of France, the group moved to Geneva, where Smith met with the philosopher Voltaire.[21]
After staying in Geneva, the party went to Paris, where Smith came to know intellectual leaders such as Benjamin Franklin,[22] Turgot, Jean D'Alembert, André Morellet, Helvétius and, in particular, François Quesnay, the head of the Physiocratic school, whose ideas impressed him[23] so that he considered dedicating Quesnay his The Wealth of Nations had Quesnay not died earlier.[24] The physiocrats opposed mercantilism, the dominating economic theory at the time, by taking up the motto Laissez faire et laissez passer, le monde va de lui même! (Let do and let pass, the world goes on by itself!). They also declared that only agriculture produced wealth, and that merchants and manufacturers did not.[22] But this, their praising nature, and a natural style of life was a necessary smoke screen, because criticising openly the consumption pattern of nobility and church – the only clients merchants and manufacturers had[25] after Louis XIV and Louis XV ruined France by lost wars,[26] help to the American insurgents against the British, and above all the excessive consumption of unproductive labour – labour which does not contribute to economic reproduction – would have been lethal. And if nobility and church are disposable for economic reproduction including those who work for them, in feudal France agriculture was the only sector important to maintain the society. As English distribution of income differed sharply from French, this was not fully understood by Adam Smith who concluded that their teachings are "with all its imperfections [perhaps] the nearest approximation to the truth that has yet been published upon the subject of political economy".[27] The distinction of productive versus unproductive labour – the physiocratic classe steril – became the central issue to the development approach of classical economics.
Later years
In 1766, Henry Scott's younger brother died in Paris, and Smith's tour as a tutor ended shortly thereafter.[22] Smith returned home that year to Kirkcaldy, and he devoted much of the next ten years to his magnum opus.[28] There he befriended Henry Moyes, a young blind man who showed precocious aptitude. As well as teaching Moyes, Smith secured the patronage of David Hume and Thomas Reid in the young man's education.[29] In May 1773, Smith was elected fellow of the Royal Society of London,[30] and was elected a member of the Literary Club in 1775.[31] The Wealth of Nations was published in 1776 and was an instant success, selling out its first edition in only six months.[32]
In 1778, Smith was appointed to a post as commissioner of customs in Scotland and went to live with his mother in Panmure House in Edinburgh's Canongate.[33] Five years later, as a member of the Philosophical Society of Edinburgh when it received its royal charter, he automatically became one of the founding members of the Royal Society of Edinburgh,[34] and from 1787 to 1789 he occupied the honorary position of Lord Rector of the University of Glasgow.[35] He died in the northern wing of Panmure House in Edinburgh on 17 July 1790 after a painful illness and was buried in the Canongate Kirkyard.[36] On his death bed, Smith expressed disappointment that he had not achieved more.[37]
Smith's literary executors were two friends from the Scottish academic world: the physicist and chemist Joseph Black, and the pioneering geologist James Hutton.[38] Smith left behind many notes and some unpublished material, but gave instructions to destroy anything that was not fit for publication.[39] He mentioned an early unpublished History of Astronomy as probably suitable, and it duly appeared in 1795, along with other material such as Essays on Philosophical Subjects.[38]
Smith's library went by his will to David Douglas, Lord Reston (son of his cousin Colonel Robert Douglas of Strathendry, Fife), who lived with Smith. It was eventually divided between his two surviving children, Cecilia Margaret (Mrs. Cunningham) and David Anne (Mrs. Bannerman). On the death of her husband, the Rev. W. B. Cunningham of Prestonpans in 1878, Mrs. Cunningham sold some of the books. The remainder passed to her son, Professor Robert Oliver Cunningham of Queen's College, Belfast, who presented a part to the library of Queen's College. After his death the remaining books were sold. On the death of Mrs. Bannerman in 1879 her portion of the library went intact to the New College (of the Free Church), Edinburgh.
Personality and beliefs
Character
Not much is known about Smith's personal views beyond what can be deduced from his published articles. His personal papers were destroyed after his death at his request.[39] He never married,[41] and seems to have maintained a close relationship with his mother, with whom he lived after his return from France and who died six years before his own death.[42]
Smith, who is often described as a prototypical absent-minded professor,[43] is considered by historians to have been an eccentric but benevolent intellectual, comically absent-minded, with peculiar habits of speech and gait, and a smile of "inexpressible benignity".[44] He was known to talk to himself,[37] a habit that began during his childhood when he would speak to himself and smile in rapt conversation with invisible companions.[43] He also had occasional spells of imaginary illness,[37] and he is reported to have had books and papers placed in tall stacks in his study.[43]
Various anecdotes have discussed his absent-minded nature. In one story, Smith took Charles Townshend on a tour of a tanning factory, and while discussing free trade, Smith walked into a huge tanning pit from which he needed help to escape.[45] Another episode records that he put bread and butter into a teapot, drank the concoction, and declared it to be the worst cup of tea he ever had. In another example, Smith went out walking and daydreaming in his nightgown and ended up 15 miles (24 km) outside town before nearby church bells brought him back to reality.[43][45]
Smith, who is reported to have been an odd-looking fellow, has been described as someone who "had a large nose, bulging eyes, a protruding lower lip, a nervous twitch, and a speech impediment".[8] Smith is said to have acknowledged his looks at one point, saying, "I am a beau in nothing but my books."[8] Smith rarely sat for portraits,[46] so almost all depictions of him created during his lifetime were drawn from memory. The best-known portraits of Smith are the profile by James Tassie and two etchings by John Kay.[47] The line engravings produced for the covers of 19th century reprints of The Wealth of Nations were based largely on Tassie's medallion.[48]
Religious views
There has been considerable scholarly debate about the nature of Smith's religious views. Smith's father had a strong interest in Christianity and belonged to the moderate wing of the Church of Scotland.[49] In addition to the fact that he received the Snell Exhibition, Smith may have also moved to England with the intention of pursuing a career in the Church of England. At Oxford, Smith rejected Christianity and it is generally believed that he returned to Scotland as a deist.[50]
Economist Ronald Coase has challenged the view that Smith was a deist,[51] stating that while Smith may have referred to the "Great Architect of the Universe" in his works, other scholars have "very much exaggerated the extent to which Adam Smith was committed to a belief in a personal God".[52] He based this on analysis of a remark in The Wealth of Nations where Smith writes that the curiosity of mankind about the "great phenomena of nature" such as "the generation, the life, growth and dissolution of plants and animals" has led men to "enquire into their causes".[53] Coase also notes Smith's observation that "[s]uperstition first attempted to satisfy this curiosity, by referring all those wonderful appearances to the immediate agency of the gods."[53]
Published works
The Theory of Moral Sentiments
Main article: The Theory of Moral Sentiments
In 1759, Smith published his first work, The Theory of Moral Sentiments. He continued making extensive revisions to the book, up until his death.[N 2] Although The Wealth of Nations is widely regarded as Smith's most influential work, it is believed that Smith himself considered The Theory of Moral Sentiments to be a superior work.[55]
In the work, Smith critically examines the moral thinking of his time, and suggests that conscience arises from social relationships.[56] His goal in writing the work was to explain the source of mankind's ability to form moral judgments, in spite of man's natural inclinations towards self-interest. Smith proposes a theory of sympathy, in which the act of observing others makes people aware of themselves and the morality of their own behavior.[57]
Scholars have traditionally perceived a conflict between The Theory of Moral Sentiments and The Wealth of Nations; the former emphasizes sympathy for others, while the latter focuses on the role of self-interest.[58] In recent years, however, most scholars[59][60][61] of Smith's work have argued that no contradiction exists.[62] They claim that in The Theory of Moral Sentiments, Smith develops a theory of psychology in which individuals seek the approval of the "impartial spectator" as a result of a natural desire to have outside observers sympathize with them. Rather than viewing The Wealth of Nations and The Theory of Moral Sentiments as presenting incompatible views of human nature, most Smith scholars regard the works as emphasizing different aspects of human nature that vary depending on the situation. The Wealth of Nations draws on situations where man's morality is likely to play a smaller role, such as the laborer involved in pin-making, whereas The Theory of Moral Sentiments focuses on situations where man's morality is likely to play a dominant role among more personal exchanges.[citation needed]
These views ignore that Smith's visit to France (1764–66) changed radically his former views and that The Wealth of Nations is an inhomogeneous convolute of his former lectures and of what Quesnay taught him.[63] Before his voyage to France in The Theory of Moral Sentiments, Adam Smith refers to an "invisible hand"[64] which procures that the gluttony of the rich helps the poor as the stomach of rich is so limited that they have to spend their fortune on servants. After his visit to France, Smith considers in the Wealth of Nations (1776) the gluttony of the rich as unproductive labour. The micro-economical/psychological view in the tradition of Aristotle, Puffendorf and Hutcheson,[65] Smith's teacher, – elements compatible with a neoclassical theory – chanced to the macro-economical view of the classical theory Smith learned in France.[clarification needed]
The Wealth of Nations
Main article: The Wealth of Nations
There is a fundamental dissent between classical and neoclassical economists about the central message of Smith's most influential work: An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations. Neoclassical economists emphasise Smith's invisible hand,[66] a concept mentioned in the middle of his work – book IV, chapter II – and classical economists believe that Smith stated his programme how to promote the "Wealth of Nations" in the first sentences.
Smith used the term "the invisible hand" in "History of Astronomy"[67] referring to "the invisible hand of Jupiter" and twice – each time with a different meaning – the term "an invisible hand": in The Theory of Moral Sentiments[68] (1759) and in The Wealth of Nations[69] (1776). This last statement about "an invisible hand" has been interpreted as "the invisible hand" in numerous ways. It is therefore important to read the original:
As every individual, therefore, endeavours as much as he can both to employ his capital in the support of domestick industry, and so to direct that industry that its produce may be of the greatest value; every individual necessarily labours to render the annual revenue of the society as great as he can. He generally, indeed, neither intends to promote the public interest, nor knows how much he is promoting it. By preferring the support of domestiek to that of foreign industry, he intends only his own security; and by directing that industry in such a manner as its produce may be of the greatest value, he intends only his own gain, and he is in this, as in many other eases, led by an invisible hand to promote an end which was no part of his intention. Nor is it always the worse for the society that it was no part of it. By pursuing his own interest he frequently promotes that of the society more effectually than when he really intends to promote it. I have never known much good done by those who affected to trade for the publick good. [emphasis added].
Those who regard that statement as Smith's central message also quote frequently Smith's dictum:[70]
It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker, that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest. We address ourselves, not to their humanity but to their self-love, and never talk to them of our own necessities but of their advantages.
Smith's statement about the benefits of "an invisible hand" is certainly meant to answer Mandeville's contention that "Private Vices … may be turned into Public Benefits".[71] It shows Smith's belief that when an individual pursues his self-interest, he indirectly promotes the good of society. Self-interested competition in the free market, he argued, would tend to benefit society as a whole by keeping prices low, while still building in an incentive for a wide variety of goods and services. Nevertheless, he was wary of businessmen and warned of their "conspiracy against the public or in some other contrivance to raise prices."[72] Again and again, Smith warned of the collusive nature of business interests, which may form cabals or monopolies, fixing the highest price "which can be squeezed out of the buyers".[73] Smith also warned that a true laissez-faire economy would quickly become a conspiracy of businesses and industry against consumers, with the former scheming to influence politics and legislation. Smith states that the interest of manufacturers and merchants "...in any particular branch of trade or manufactures, is always in some respects different from, and even opposite to, that of the public...The proposal of any new law or regulation of commerce which comes from this order, ought always to be listened to with great precaution, and ought never be adopted till after having been long and carefully examined, not only with the most scrupulous, but with the most suspicious attention."[74]
The neoclassical interest in Smith's statement about "an invisible hand" originates in the possibility to see it as a precursor of neoclassical economics and its General Equilibrium concept. Samuelson's "Economics" refers 6 times to Smith's "invisible hand". To emphasize this relation, Samuelson[75] quotes Smith's "invisible hand" statement putting "general interest" where Smith wrote "publick interest". Samuelson[76] concluded: "Smith was unable to prove the essence of his invisible-hand doctrine. Indeed, until the 1940s no one knew how to prove, even to state properly, the kernel of truth in this proposition about perfectly competitive market." And it was then when neoclassical economics was revived in Chicago from oblivion and Samuelson entered the scene.
Very differently, classical economists see in Smith's first sentences his programme to promote "The Wealth of Nations". Taking up the physiocratical concept of the economy as a circular process means that to have growth the inputs of period-2 must excel the inputs of period-1. Therefore the outputs of period-1 not used or usable as input of period-2 are regarded as unproductive labour as they do not contribute to growth. This is what Smith had learned in France with Quesnay. To this French insight that unproductive labour should be pushed back to use more labor productively, Smith added his own proposal, that productive labor should be made even more productive by deepening the division of labor. Deepening the division of labor means under competition lower prices and thereby extended markets. Extended markets and increased production lead to a new step of reorganising production and inventing new ways of producing which again lower prices, etc., etc.. Smith's central message is therefore that under dynamic competition a growth machine secures "The Wealth of Nations". It predicted England's evolution as the workshop of the World, underselling all its competitors. The opening sentences of the "Wealth of Nations" summarize this policy:
The annual labor of every nation is the fund which originally supplies it with all the necessaries and conveniences of life which it annually consumes … . [T]his produce … bears a greater or smaller proportion to the number of those who are to consume it … .[B]ut this proportion must in every nation be regulated by two different circumstances;
§ first, by the skill, dexterity, and judgment with which its labor is generally applied; and,
§ secondly, by the proportion between the number of those who are employed in useful labour, and that of those who are not so employed [emphasis added].[77]
Smith's "Wealth of Nations" offers many insights other theories disagree. It argues that agriculture offers fewer possibilities to a division of labour,[78] raising its prices compared with industry. [Us-American and European agriculture is therefore subsidised]. To Smith, the genius and the natural talents of men are no natural dispositions which have to be paid for according to comparative advantages. "It is not upon many occasions so much the cause, as the effect of the division of labour."[79] Competition should reduce the prices of these "talents". Smith suspects manufacturers of mischief and trusts landowners and labourers – as consumers – to represent the common good. [Ricardo mistrusts landowners as earners of a monopoly income.]
Other works
Shortly before his death, Smith had nearly all his manuscripts destroyed. In his last years, he seemed to have been planning two major treatises, one on the theory and history of law and one on the sciences and arts. The posthumously published Essays on Philosophical Subjects, a history of astronomy down to Smith's own era, plus some thoughts on ancient physics and metaphysics, probably contain parts of what would have been the latter treatise. Lectures on Jurisprudence were notes taken from Smith's early lectures, plus an early draft of The Wealth of Nations, published as part of the 1976 Glasgow Edition of the works and correspondence of Smith. Other works, including some published posthumously, includeLectures on Justice, Police, Revenue, and Arms (1763) (first published in 1896); A Treatise on Public Opulence (1764) (first published in 1937); and Essays on Philosophical Subjects (1795).[80]
Legacy
In economics and moral philosophy
The Wealth of Nations was a precursor to the modern academic discipline of economics. In this and other works, Smith expounded how rational self-interest and competition can lead to economic prosperity. Smith was controversial in his own day and his general approach and writing style were often satirized by Tory writers in the moralizing tradition of Hogarth and Swift, as a discussion at the University of Winchester suggests.[81]
George Stigler attributes to Smith "the most important substantive proposition in all of economics" and foundation of resource-allocation theory. It is that, under competition, owners of resources (for example labor, land, and capital) will use them most profitably, resulting in an equal rate of return in equilibrium for all uses, adjusted for apparent differences arising from such factors as training, trust, hardship, and unemployment.[82]
Paul Samuelson finds in Smith's pluralist use of supply and demand as applied to wages, rents, profit a valid and valuable anticipation of thegeneral equilibrium modeling of Walras a century later. Smith's allowance for wage increases in the short and intermediate term from capital accumulation and invention added a realism missed later by Malthus, Ricardo, and Marx in their propounding a rigid subsistence-wage theory of labour supply.[83]
On the other hand, Joseph Schumpeter dismissed Smith's contributions as unoriginal, saying "His very limitation made for success. Had he been more brilliant, he would not have been taken so seriously. Had he dug more deeply, had he unearthed more recondite truth, had he used more difficult and ingenious methods, he would not have been understood. But he had no such ambitions; in fact he disliked whatever went beyond plain common sense. He never moved above the heads of even the dullest readers. He led them on gently, encouraging them by trivialities and homely observations, making them feel comfortable all along."[84]
Classical economists presented competing theories of those of Smith, termed the "labour theory of value". Later Marxian economics descending from classical economics also use Smith's labour theories, in part. The first volume of Karl Marx's major work, Capital, was published in German in 1867. In it, Marx focused on the labour theory of value and what he considered to be the exploitation of labour by capital.[85][86] The labour theory of value held that the value of a thing was determined by the labor that went into its production. This contrasts with the modern understanding of mainstream economics, that the value of a thing is determined by what one is willing to give up to obtain the thing.
The body of theory later termed "neoclassical economics" or "marginalism" formed from about 1870 to 1910. The term "economics" was popularized by such neoclassical economists as Alfred Marshall as a concise synonym for "economic science" and a substitute for the earlier, broader term "political economy" used by Smith.[87][88] This corresponded to the influence on the subject of mathematical methods used in the natural sciences.[89] Neoclassical economics systematizedsupply and demand as joint determinants of price and quantity in market equilibrium, affecting both the allocation of output and the distribution of income. It dispensed with the labour theory of valueof which Smith was most famously identified with in classical economics, in favour of a marginal utility theory of value on the demand side and a more general theory of costs on the supply side.[90]
The bicentennial anniversary of the publication of The Wealth of Nations was celebrated in 1976, resulting in increased interest for The Theory of Moral Sentiments and his other works throughout academia. After 1976, Smith was more likely to be represented as the author of both The Wealth of Nations and The Theory of Moral Sentiments, and thereby as the founder of a moral philosophy and the science of economics. His homo economicus or "economic man" was also more often represented as a moral person. Additionally, his opposition to slavery, colonialism, and empire[clarification needed] was emphasized, as were his statements about high wages for the poor, and his views that a common street porter was not intellectually inferior to a philosopher.[91]
Portraits, monuments, and banknotes
Smith has been commemorated in the UK on banknotes printed by two different banks; his portrait has appeared since 1981 on the £50 notes issued by the Clydesdale Bankin Scotland,[92][93] and in March 2007 Smith's image also appeared on the new series of £20 notes issued by the Bank of England, making him the first Scotsman to feature on anEnglish banknote.[94]
A large-scale memorial of Smith by Alexander Stoddart was unveiled on 4 July 2008 in Edinburgh. It is a 10 feet (3.0 m)-tall bronze sculpture and it stands above the Royal Mile outside St Giles' Cathedral in
Residence
His house on Panmure Close off the Canongate survived until 1889,[100] but a nearby building of similar age adopted the stance of having been his house (in the same manner as John Knox's House) erecting a plaque c.1950 proclaiming itself as having been his residence. In reality it was a far grander building than that remaining.
As a symbol of free market economics
Smith has been celebrated by advocates of free market policies as the founder of free market economics, a view reflected in the naming of bodies such as the Adam Smith Institute, Adam Smith Society[101] and the Australian Adam Smith Club,[102] and in terms such as the Adam Smith necktie.[103]
Alan Greenspan argues that, while Smith did not coin the term laissez-faire, "it was left to Adam Smith to identify the more-general set of principles that brought conceptual clarity to the seeming chaos of market transactions". Greenspan continues that The Wealth of Nations was "one of the great achievements in human intellectual history".[104] P. J. O'Rourke describes Smith as the "founder of free market economics".[105]
However, other writers have argued that Smith's support for laissez-faire (which in French means leave alone) has been overstated. Herbert Stein wrote that the people who "wear an Adam Smith necktie" do it to "make a statement of their devotion to the idea of free markets and limited government", and that this misrepresents Smith's ideas. Stein writes that Smith "was not pure or doctrinaire about this idea. He viewed government intervention in the market with great skepticism ... yet he was prepared to accept or propose qualifications to that policy in the specific cases where he judged that their net effect would be beneficial and would not undermine the basically free character of the system. He did not wear the Adam Smith necktie." In Stein's reading, The Wealth of Nations could justify the Food and Drug Administration, the Consumer Product Safety Commission, mandatory employer health benefits, environmentalism, and "discriminatory taxation to deter improper or luxurious behavior".[106]
Similarly, Vivienne Brown stated in The Economic Journal that in the 20th century United States, Reaganomics supporters, The Wall Street Journal, and other similar sources have spread among the general public a partial and misleading vision of Smith, portraying him as an "extreme dogmatic defender of laissez-faire capitalism and supply-side economics".[107] In fact, The Wealth of Nations includes the following statement on the payment of taxes:
"The subjects of every state ought to contribute towards the support of the government, as nearly as possible, in proportion to their respective abilities; that is, in proportion to the revenue which they respectively enjoy under the protection of the state."[108]
Moreover, in this passage Smith goes on to specify progressive, not flat, taxation:
"The rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion"[109]
Smith even specifically named taxes that he thought should be required by the state among them luxury goods taxes and tax on rent. He believed that tax laws should be as transparent as possible and that each individual should pay a "certain amount, and not arbitrary," in addition to paying this tax at the time "most likely to be convenient for the contributor to pay it".[108] Smith goes on to state that:
"Every tax, however, is, to the person who pays it, a badge, not of slavery, but of liberty."[110]
Additionally, Smith outlined the proper expenses of the government in The Wealth of Nations, Book V, Ch. I. Included in his requirements of a government is to enforce contracts and provide justice system, grant patents and copy rights, provide public goods such as infrastructure, provide national defense and regulate banking. It was the role of the government to provide goods "of such a nature that the profit could never repay the expense to any individual" such as roads, bridges, canals, and harbours. He also encouraged invention and new ideas through his patent enforcement and support of infant industry monopolies. he supported public education and religious institutions as providing general benefit to the society. Finally he outlined how the government should support the dignity of the monarch or chief magistrate, such that they are equal or above the public in fashion. He even states that monarchs should be provided for in a greater fashion than magistrates of a republic because "we naturally expect more splendor in the court of a king than in the mansion-house of a doge."[111] In addition, he was in favor of retaliatory tariffs and believed that they would eventually bring down the price of goods. He even stated in Wealth of Nations:
"The recovery of a great foreign market will generally more than compensate the transitory inconvenience of paying dearer during a short time for some sorts of goods."[112]
Noam Chomsky has argued[N 3] that several aspects of Smith's thought have been misrepresented and falsified by contemporary ideology, including Smith's reasons for supporting markets and Smith's views on corporations. Chomsky argues that Smith supported markets in the belief that they would lead to equality, and that Smith opposed wage labor and corporations.[113] Economic historians such as Jacob Vinerregard Smith as a strong advocate of free markets and limited government (what Smith called "natural liberty") but not as a dogmatic supporter of laissez-faire.[114]
Economist Daniel Klein believes using the term "free market economics" or "free market economist" to identify the ideas of Smith is too general and slightly misleading. Klein offers six characteristics central to the identity of Smith's economic thought and argues that a new name is needed to give a more accurate depiction of the "Smithian" identity.[115][116] Economist David Ricardo set straight some of the misunderstandings about Smith's thoughts on free market. Most people still fall victim to the thinking that Smith was a free market economist without exception, though he was not. Ricardo pointed out that Smith was in support of helping infant industries. Smith believed that the government should subsidise newly formed industry, but he did fear that when the infant industry grew into adulthood it would be unwilling to surrender the government help.[117] Smith also supported tariffs on imported goods to counteract an internal tax on the same good. Smith also fell to pressure in supporting some tariffs in support for national defense.[117]
Footnotes
1. ^ In Life of Adam Smith, Rae writes, "In his fourth year, while on a visit to his grandfather's house at Strathendry on the banks of the Leven, [Smith] was stolen by a passing band of gypsies, and for a time could not be found. But presently a gentleman arrived who had met a gypsy woman a few miles down the road carrying a child that was crying piteously. Scouts were immediately dispatched in the direction indicated, and they came upon the woman in Leslie wood. As soon as she saw them she threw her burden down and escaped, and the child was brought back to his mother. [Smith] would have made, I fear, a poor gypsy."[3]
2. ^ The 6 editions of The Theory of Moral Sentiments were published in 1759, 1761, 1767, 1774, 1781, and 1790 respectively.[54]
3. ^ See chapters 2, 5, 6, and 10 of his Understanding Power, New Press (February 2002), along with his Year 501: The Conquest Continues, primarily chapter 1, South End Press, 1993.
Notes
1. ^ Bussing-Burks 2003, pp. 38–39
2. ^ Buchan 2006, p. 12
4. ^ a b c Bussing-Burks 2003, p. 39
5. ^ Buchan 2006, p. 22
6. ^ Bussing-Burks 2003, p. 41
8. ^ a b c d Buchholz 1999, p. 12
9. ^ Introductory Economics. New Age Publishers. p. 4.ISBN 8122418309.
12. ^ a b Bussing-Burks 2003, p. 42
13. ^ Buchan 2006, p. 29
15. ^ a b Bussing-Burks 2003, p. 43
16. ^ Winch, Donald (September 2004). "Smith, Adam (bap. 1723, d. 1790)". Dictionary of National Biography. Oxford University Press.
18. ^ a b Buchholz 1999, p. 15
19. ^ Buchan 2006, p. 67
20. ^ a b c d e Buchholz 1999, p. 16
21. ^ Buchholz 1999, pp. 16–17
22. ^ a b c Buchholz 1999, p. 17
23. ^ Buchan 2006, p. 80
24. ^ Stewart, D., 1799, Essays on Philosophical Subjects, to which is prefixed An Account of the Life and Writings of the Author by Dugald Steward, F.R.S.E., Basil; from the Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, Read by M. Steward, January 21, and March 18, 1793; in: The Glasgow edition of the Works and Correspondence of Adam Smith, 1982, vol. 3, pp. 304 ff.
25. ^ During the reign of Louis XIV population shrunk by 4 millions and agriculture by one-third, but taxes increased; Cusminsky, Rosa, de Cendrero, 1967, Los Fisiócratas, Buenos Aires: Centro Editor de América Latina, p. 6
26. ^ 1701–1714 War of the Spanish Succession, 1688–1797 War of the Grand Alliance, 1672–1678 Franco-Dutch War, 1667–1668 War of Devolution, 1618–1648 Thirty Years' War.
27. ^ Smith, A., 1976, The Wealth of Nations edited by R.H. Campbell and A.S. Skinner, The Glasgow edition of the Works and Correspondence of Adam Smith, vol. 2b, pp. 678.
28. ^ Buchan 2006, p. 90
29. ^ Dr James Currie to Thomas Creevey, 24 February 1793, Lpool RO, Currie MS 920 CUR
30. ^ Buchan 2006, p. 89
31. ^ "First Visit to London". Library of Economics and Liberty. Retrieved 2008-05-22.
32. ^ Buchholz 1999, p. 19
33. ^ Buchan 2006, p. 128
34. ^ Buchan 2006, p. 133
35. ^ Buchan 2006, p. 137
36. ^ Buchan 2006, p. 145
37. ^ a b c Bussing-Burks 2003, p. 53
38. ^ a b Buchan 2006, p. 25
39. ^ a b Buchan 2006, p. 88
40. ^ Bonar 1895, pp. xx–xxiv
41. ^ Buchan 2006, p. 11
42. ^ Buchan 2006, p. 134
43. ^ a b c d Skousen 2001, p. 32
45. ^ a b Buchholz 1999, p. 14
46. ^ Stewart, Dugald (1853). The Works of Adam Smith: With An Account of His Life and Writings. London: Henry G. Bohn. lxix.OCLC 3226570.
48. ^ Bonar 1895, p. xxi
50. ^ "Times obituary of Adam Smith". The Times. 1790-07-24.
51. ^ Coase 1976, pp. 529–546
52. ^ Coase 1976, p. 538
53. ^ a b "Hume on Religion". Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved 2008-05-26.
54. ^ "Adam Smith, Glasgow Edition of the Works and Correspondence Vol. 1 The Theory of Moral Sentiments [1759"]. The Online Library of Liberty. Retrieved 2010-01-31.
56. ^ Falkner, Robert (1997). "Biography of Smith". Liberal Democrat History Group. Retrieved 2008-05-14.
57. ^ Smith 2002, p. xv
58. ^ Viner 1991, p. 250
59. ^ Wight, Jonathan B. Saving Adam Smith. Upper Saddle River: Prentic-Hall, Inc., 2002.
60. ^ Robbins, Lionel. A History of Economic Thought. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1998.
61. ^ Brue, Stanley L, and Randy R Grant. The Evolution of Economic Thought. Mason: Thomson Higher Education, 2007.
62. ^ There is at least one clear contradiction between The Theory of Moral Sentiments and The Wealth of Nations: The gluttony of the landlords is in the former an "invisible hand" which helps the poor to partake in the landlord's wealth. In "The Wealth of Nations" it is seen as the consumption of unproductive labour, limiting the growth of wealth.
63. ^ Cannan, Edwin (ed.), 1937, p. xxxix, Editor's Introduction, pp. xxxviii–xli to: Adam Smith, "An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations", N. Y.: Random House; "These changes [to the earlier lectures by his visit to France] do not make so much real difference to Smith's own work as might be supposed; the theory of distribution, thought it appears in the title of Book I., is no essential part of the work and could easily be excised … But to subsequent [classical] economics they were of fundamental importance. They settled the form of economic treatises for a century at least."
64. ^ Smith, A., 1982 [1759], "Theory of Moral Sentiment", pp. 184–5 in: The Glasgow edition of the Works and Correspondence of Adam Smith, vol. i", Oxford University Press.
65. ^ "The learned will at once discern how much … is taken from the writings of others, from Cicero and Aristotle, and to name no other moderns, from Puffendorf's … de officio hominis et civis" (Hutcheson, F., 1787, "A Short Introduction to Moral Philosophy", Dublin: McKenzie, p. vii.). In "System" (1755), Hutcheson's begins stating: "The intention of moral philosophy is to direct men to that course of action which tends most effectually to promote their greatest happiness and perfection." (Hutcheson, F., 1755, "A system of moral philosophy", Glasgow: Foulis). In "Inquiry", Hutcheson (1729, 180) explains: "That action is best, which procures the greatest Happiness for the greatest Numbers" (Hutcheson, F., 1729, "An inquiry into the original of our ideas of beauty and virtue", London).
66. ^ Smith, A., 1976, The Wealth of Nations edited by R.H. Campbell and A.S. Skinner, The Glasgow edition of the Works and Correspondence of Adam Smith, vol. 2a, p. 456.
67. ^ Smith, A., 1980, The Glasgow edition of the Works and Correspondence of Adam Smith, vol. 3, p. 49, edited by W.P.D. Wightman and J.C. Bryce, Oxford: Claredon Press.
68. ^ Smith, A., 1976, The Glasgow edition of the Works and Correspondence of Adam Smith, vol. 1, p. 184-5, edited by D.D. Raphael and A.L. Macfie, Oxford: Claredon Press.
69. ^ Smith, A., 1976, The Glasgow edition of the Works and Correspondence of Adam Smith, vol. 2a, p. 456, edited by R.H. Cambell and A.S. Skinner, Oxford: Claredon Press.
70. ^ Smith, A., 1976, The Glasgow edition, vol. 2a, pp. 26–7.
71. ^ Mandeville, B., 1724, The Fable of the Bees, London: Tonson.
72. ^ Smith, A., 1976, The Glasgow edition, vol. 2a, p. 145, 158.
73. ^ Smith, A., 1976, The Glasgow edition, vol. 2a, p. 79.
74. ^ Gopnik, Adam. "Market Man". The New Yorker (October 18, 2010): 82. Retrieved April 27, 2011.
75. ^ Samuelson, P. A./Nordhaus, William D., 1989, Economics, 13th edition, N.Y. et al.: McGraw-Hill, p. 825.
76. ^ Samuelson, P. A./Nordhaus, William D., 1989, idem, p. 825.
77. ^ Smith, A., 1976, vol. 2a, p. 10, idem
78. ^ Smith, A., 1976, The Glasgow edition, vol. 2a, p. 16.
79. ^ Smith, A., 1976, The Glasgow edition, vol. 2a, p. 28.
80. ^ The Glasgow edition of the Works and Correspondence of Adam Smith, 1982, 6 volumes; http://oll.libertyfund.org/
81. ^ "Adam Smith – Jonathan Swift". University of Winchester. Retrieved 2010-02-11.
82. ^ Stigler, George J. (1976). "The Successes and Failures of Professor Smith," Journal of Political Economy, 84(6), p. 1202. P p. 1199-1213, Also published as Selected Papers, No. 50 (PDF), Graduate School of Business, University of Chicago.
83. ^ Samuelson, Paul A. (1977). "A Modern Theorist's Vindication of Adam Smith," American Economic Review, 67(1), p p. 42.Reprinted in J.C. Wood, ed., Adam Smith: Critical Assessments, pp. 498–509. Preview.
84. ^ Schumpeter History of Economic Analysis. New York: Oxford University Press. p. 185.
85. ^ Roemer, J.E. (1987). "Marxian Value Analysis". The New Palgrave: A Dictionary of Economics, v. 3, 383.
86. ^ Mandel, Ernest (1987). "Marx, Karl Heinrich", The New Palgrave: A Dictionary of Economicsv. 3, pp. 372, 376.
87. ^ Marshall, Alfred; Marshall, Mary Paley (1879). The Economics of Industry. p. 2.
88. ^ Jevons, W. Stanley (1879). The Theory of Political Economy(2nd ed.). p. xiv.
89. ^ Clark, B. (1998). Political-economy: A comparative approach, 2nd ed., Westport, CT: Preagerp. p. 32..
90. ^ Campos, Antonietta (1987). "Marginalist Economics", The New Palgrave: A Dictionary of Economics, v. 3, p. 320
91. ^ Smith 1977, §Book I, Chapter 2
92. ^ "Clydesdale 50 Pounds, 1981". Ron Wise's Banknoteworld. Retrieved 2008-10-15.
93. ^ "Current Banknotes : Clydesdale Bank". The Committee of Scottish Clearing Bankers. Retrieved 2008-10-15.
94. ^ "Smith replaces Elgar on £20 note". BBC. 2006-10-29. Retrieved 2008-05-14.
95. ^ Blackley, Michael (2007-09-26). "Adam Smith sculpture to tower over Royal Mile". Edinburgh Evening News.
96. ^ Fillo, Maryellen (2001-03-13). "CCSU welcomes a new kid on the block". The Hartford Courant.
97. ^ Kelley, Pam (1997-05-20). "Piece at UNCC is a puzzle for Charlotte, artist says". Charlotte Observer.
98. ^ Shaw-Eagle, Joanna (1997-06-01). "Artist sheds new light on sculpture". The Washington Times.
99. ^ "Adam Smith's Spinning Top". Ohio Outdoor Sculpture Inventory. Archived from the original on 2005-02-05. Retrieved 2008-05-24.
100. ^ contemporary newspaper records; Scotsman
101. ^ "The Adam Smith Society". The Adam Smith Society. Archived from the original on 2007-07-21. Retrieved 2008-05-24.
102. ^ "The Australian Adam Smith Club". Adam Smith Club. Retrieved 2008-10-12.
103. ^ Levy, David (June 1992). "Interview with Milton Friedman". Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis. Retrieved 2008-09-01.
104. ^ "FRB: Speech, Greenspan—Adam Smith—6 February 2005". Retrieved 2008-05-31.
105. ^ "Adam Smith: Web Junkie - Forbes.com". 2007-07-05. Retrieved 2008-06-10.
106. ^ Stein, Herbert (1994-04-06). "Board of Contributors: Remembering Adam Smith". The Wall Street Journal Asia.: A14.
107. ^ Brown, Vivienne; Pack, Spencer J.; Werhane, Patricia H. (January 1993). "Untitled review of 'Capitalism as a Moral System: Adam Smith's Critique of the Free Market Economy' and 'Adam Smith and his Legacy for Modern Capitalism'". The Economic Journal 103(416): 230–232. doi:10.2307/2234351. JSTOR 2234351.
108. ^ a b Smith 1977, bk. V, ch. 2
109. ^ Gopnik, A., op cit
110. ^ [1] Smith, Adam (1776), Penn State Electronic Classics edition, republished 2005, p.704
111. ^ Smith 1977, bk. V
112. ^ Smith, A., 1976, The Glasgow edition, vol. 2a, p. 468.
113. ^ Chomsky 2002, ch. 6
114. ^ Viner, Jacob; Pack, Spencer J.; Werhane, Patricia H. (April 1927). "Adam Smith and Laissez-faire". The Journal of Political Economy35 (2): 198–232. doi:10.2307/2234351. JSTOR 2234351.
115. ^ Klein, Daniel B. (2008). "Toward a Public and Professional Identity for Our Economics". Econ Journal Watch 5 (3): 358–372.
116. ^ Klein, Daniel B. (2009). "Desperately Seeking Smithians: Responses to the Questionnaire about Building an Identity".Econ Journal Watch 6 (1): 113–180.
117. ^ a b Buchholz, Todd (December 1990). pp. 38–39.
References
§ Bonar, James (1895). A Catalogue of the Library of Adam Smith. London: Macmillan. OCLC 2320634.
§ Buchan, James (2006). The Authentic Adam Smith: His Life and Ideas. W. W. Norton & Company. ISBN 0393061213.
§ Buchholz, Todd (1999). New ideas from Dead Economists: An introduction to modern economic thought. Penguin Books.ISBN 0140283137.
§ Bussing-Burks, Marie (2003). Influential Economists. Minneapolis: The Oliver Press. ISBN 1-881508-72-2.
§ Campbell, R. H.; Skinner, Andrew S. (1985). Adam Smith. Routledge. ISBN 0709934734.
§ Chomsky, Noam (2002). Understanding power: the indispensable Chomsky. Scribe Publications. ISBN 9780908011728.
§ Coase, R.H. (October 1976). "Adam Smith's View of Man". The Journal of Law and Economics 19 (3): 529–546. doi:10.1086/466886.
§ Rae, John (1895). Life of Adam Smith. New York City: Macmillan Publishers. ISBN 0722226586.
§ Ross, Ian Simpson (December 14, 1995). The Life of Adam Smith. Oxford University Press. ISBN 0198288212.
§ Skousen, Mark (2001). The Making of Modern Economics: The Lives and Ideas of Great Thinkers. M.E. Sharpe. ISBN 0765604809.
§ Smith, Adam (1977) [1776]. An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations. University Of Chicago Press.ISBN 0226763749.
§ Smith, Adam (1982) [1759]. The Theory of Moral Sentiments, ed. D.D. Raphael and A.L. Macfie, vol. I of the Glasgow Edition of the Works and Correspondence of Adam Smith. Liberty Fund. ISBN 0865970122.
§ Smith, Adam (2002) [1759]. Knud Haakonssen. ed. The Theory of Moral Sentiments. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0521598478.
§ Smith, Vernon L. (July 1998). "The Two Faces of Adam Smith". Southern Economic Journal 65 (1): 2–19.
§ Tribe, Keith; Mizuta, Hiroshi (2002). A Critical Bibliography of Adam Smith. Pickering & Chatto. ISBN 9781851967414.
§ Viner, Jacob (1991). Douglas A. Irvin. ed. Essays on the Intellectual History of Economics. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press. ISBN 0691042667.
This article incorporates text from a publication now in the public domainfrom the entry "Smith, Adam" in: Cousin, John William (1910). A Short Biographical Dictionary of English Literature. London, J. M. Dent & Sons; New York, E. P. Dutton.
Further reading
§ Butler, Eamonn (March 2007). Adam Smith – A Primer. Institute of Economic Affairs. ISBN 0255366086.
§ Copley, Stephen (March 1995). Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations: New Interdisciplinary Essays. Manchester University Press.ISBN 0719039436.
§ Glahe, F. (June 1977). Adam Smith and the Wealth of Nations: 1776–1976. University Press of Colorado. ISBN 0870810820.
§ Haakonssen, Knud (2006-03-06). The Cambridge Companion to Adam Smith. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0521779243.
§ Hollander, Samuel (June 1973). Economics of Adam Smith. University of Toronto Press. ISBN 0802063020.
§ Iain McLean (2006). Adam Smith, Radical and Egalitarian: An Interpretation for the 21st Century. Edinburgh University Press.ISBN 0748623523.
§ Milgate, Murray and Stimson, Shannon. (August 2009). After Adam Smith: A Century of Transformation in Politics and Political Economy. Princeton University Press. ISBN 0691140375.
§ Muller, Jerry Z. (1995-07-03). Adam Smith in His Time and Ours. Princeton University Press. ISBN 0691001618.
§ O'Rourke, P. J. (2006-12-04). On The Wealth Of Nations. Grove/Atlantic Inc.. ISBN 0871139499.
§ Otteson, James (2002). Adam Smith's Marketplace of Ideas. Cambridge Univesity Press. ISBN 0521016568.
§ Phillipson Nicholas: Adam Smith: An Enlightened Life, Yale University Press, 2010 ISBN 978-0-300169270, 352 pages; scholarly biography
§ Iain McLean, Adam Smith, Radical and Egalitarian: An Interpretation for the 21st Century (Edinburgh University Press, 2004)
External links
§ 
Works related to Adam Smith at Wikisource
§ 
Quotations related to Adam Smith at Wikiquote
§ 
Media related to Adam Smith at Wikimedia Commons
§ Adam Smith at the Concise Encyclopedia of Economics
§ Adam Smith at the Adam Smith Institute
§ Works by Adam Smith on Open Library at the Internet Archive
§ Works by or about Adam Smith in libraries (WorldCat catalog)
§ Adam Smith at the Open Directory Project
| Academic offices | ||
| Preceded by | Rector of the University of Glasgow | Succeeded by |
No comments:
Post a Comment