A good account of Smiths usage and how it has nothing to do with the usages to 
which it is now put is given at:
http://adamsmithslostlegacy.blogspot.com/
________________________________________
From: [email protected] [[email protected]] On 
Behalf Of Paul Cockshott [[email protected]]
Sent: Monday, April 18, 2011 8:59 AM
To: Progressive Economics
Subject: Re: [Pen-l] invisible hand

If I recall Smith correctly Smiith used the phrase twice, once in the Moral 
sentiments to refer to the invisible hand of morality and once in the Wealth of 
Nations to refer to competition acting as an invisible hand.
________________________________________
From: [email protected] [[email protected]] On 
Behalf Of ken hanly [[email protected]]
Sent: Sunday, April 17, 2011 11:29 PM
To: Progressive Economics
Subject: Re: [Pen-l] invisible hand

 The Invisible Hand is a piece of ideological crapola meant to justify 
rationing goods on the basis of income rather than need or dessert aka as the 
free market. The hand helps up anyone with money and slaps down anyone who does 
not.

Cheers, ken


________________________________
From: Lakshmi Rhone <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Sent: Sun, April 17, 2011 3:36:12 PM
Subject: [Pen-l] invisible hand

Nice comment by Joan Robinson:

http://www.economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/2007/07/morality-and-ec.html

Haven't read Medema's new book on the invisible hand but Emma Rothschild on 
Condorect and Smith and Kaushik Basu's Beyond The Invisible Hand are very 
stimulating.
Rothschild treats Smith's references to an invisible hand as an ironic joke. 
Basu shows that the invisible hand theorems depend on all kinds of untenable 
assumptions; moreover the kind of behavior
that does tend to promote human flourishing is bound by norms in terms of which 
certain rational self-interested actions actually become unthinkable.
Amartya Sen has tried to think out the full implications not of Smith's model 
of economic man but of Smith's moral viewpoint of the impartial spectator. From 
that viewpoint he develops a critique of contemporary ethical and political 
phillosophy and Rawls in particular.
Lakshmi

The University of Glasgow, charity number SC004401
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l

The University of Glasgow, charity number SC004401
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l

Reply via email to