Review of Economic Philosophy

Tag: Society

  • How well does the Idea of “Community” relate to Confucianism?

    Beginning of the article

    Le mot « communauté » (she qun ; 社群) a été largement utilisé dans le chinois moderne. Dans le milieu universitaire, la notion est invoquée en sociologie aussi bien qu’en philosophie politique, où le concept de « communautarisme » a été largement étudié et discuté comme un exemple typique de problématique confucéenne. La compréhension et la discussion de la « communauté » ne peuvent pas être séparées de la différence entre les notions que l’allemand désigne par Gesellschaft (société, she hui ; 社会) et Gemeinschaft (communauté ; she qun ; 社群). Cependant, Gemeinschaft est un concept relativement récent dans l’histoire des idées au regard du confucianisme, de tradition beaucoup plus longue. Comment la Gemeinschaft pourrait-elle être une problématique typiquement confucéenne ?
    Pour répondre à cette question, nous retracerons la trajectoire d’acceptation de la sociologie occidentale dans la Chine moderne. Nous allons d’abord clarifier la signification spécifique de 社et 群 en chinois ancien, puis discuter la réception du terme « société » à la fin de la période Qing (la dernière dynastie régnante en Chine), et le fait qu’un grand nombre d’instituts (xue hui ; 学会) a émergé à ce moment-là. Enfin, nous discuterons l’acceptation des concepts élaborés par Ferdinand Tönnies de Gesellschaft et Gemeinschaft, et comment le terme Gemeinschaft est devenu une problématique typiquement Confucéenne depuis le vingtième siècle.
    社群 (she qun) est la traduction de « communauté » en chinois moderne…

    Abstract

    The word 社群 (she qun, community, in the sense of the German Gemeinschaft) was certainly not a traditionally Confucian topic. The general ethical understanding of ancient China rested on 三纲五常 (san gang wu chang ; the three disciplines and the five Confucian human relationships). Non-dominant religions, associations and academies were closer to the concept of community. In the late 19th century, modern Western sociological principles were first introduced to China, but intellectuals undoubtedly understood them differently because of traditional values and in reaction to the necessity to fortify the Chinese state. It took until the industrialization era, which started in the late 1970s, for the modern concept of community and society with which it was compared to become well-known in China.

    Table of Contents

    • Introduction
    • « She » et « Qun » (社 et 群)
    • « Qunxue » et « Xuehui » (« sociologie », au sens de Yan Fu, et « Institutions »)
    • « Communauté » et « société » en Chine (sur le mode de la distinction entre Gesellschaft et Gemeinschaft)
    • Confucianisme et communauté
    • Conclusion

    Keywords

    , ,

    JEL Classification : B13, B31

    [Read the article on Cairn]

  • The individual and the society in Walras

    Abstract

    Modern analyses present the general equilibrium as an archetype of methodological individualism, enabling the reconciliation of individual interests through the market. This article aims at showing the originality and the specificity of the treatment of this issue by Walras. We first show that Walras considers the individual (oneself) and the society (the others) as natural objects, which necessarily coexist, thus rejecting an individualistic ontology. But Walras also rejects holism and develops an analysis that considers the individual and the state as two complementary and inseparable entities. This results in a vision of the economic role of the state that is far removed from individualistic liberalism. The state must intervene to make free enterprise possible by organizing markets and maintaining competition. To do so, the state must have its own resources, not obtained through taxation, but through the nationalization of the land.

    JEL classification: B4, B13, B21.

    Keywords

    , , , , , , ,

    [Download in Cairn]

  • What thou liv’st, live well

    Abstract

    In paring away what was considered inessential to the economic decision, economists have pared away human flesh leaving only the bone. To revivify and incarnate this skeleton I draw on insights from the social psychology of Deci and Ryan, Dweck, and Bandura to broaden the foundation of utility theory and expand the types of resources individuals have at their disposal, both individually and as part of a group, to effect their wellbeing. These theories recognize that the effects of society on the individual are not always to the good. Their nuanced understanding of the individual in society helps put meat and muscle on economic agents’ bones by placing these agents in society, suggesting how society affects agents and revealing how agents work together to adapt and change society. A model is developed to incorporate some of these features and examples are analyzed. The behavior of the individual that arises is not easily characterized, but its essential, even economic, humanness is.

    Keywords

    , , , , ,

    Code JEL: D91.