Ricardo Crespo

A renewed concern with Aristotle’s thought about the economic aspects of human life and society can be observed. Aristotle dealt with the economic issues in his practical philosophy. He thus considered ‘the economic’ within an ethical and political frame. This vision is coherent with a specific ontology of ‘the economic’ according to Aristotle. In a recent paper, I analysed this ontology and left its consequences, especially for Ethics and Politics, for another paper. In this article, I firstly summarise the reasoning and conclusions of the aforementioned paper. Then, I extract the ethical and political “lessons” of the Aristotelian conception. I finally add a section with epistemological “lessons”, and consequences for the teaching of Economics

An economic crisis is an unexpected phenomenon with strong consequences for nations, institutions and people's wealth, habits, and behaviors. It departs from the ‘normal’ evolution of the affairs foreseen by economic theory. It makes the claim for new theoretical explanations. It surprises the economic agents that try to ascertain what kind of phenomenon they are facing in order to decide the appropriate actions to undertake. It calls for revisions of theory, plans and expectations. Overall, a crisis calls for an explanation which clarifies its causes.

The ‘value-free ideal’ has been called into question for several reasons. It does not include “epistemic values”—viewed as characteristic of ‘good science’—and rejects the so-called ‘contextual’, ‘non-cognitive’ or ‘non-epistemic’ values—all of them personal, moral, or political values. This paper analyzes a possible complementary argument about the dubitable validity of the value-free ideal, specifically focusing on social sciences, with a two-fold strategy. First, it will consider that values are natural facts in a broad or ‘liberal naturalist’ sense and, thus, a legitimate part of those sciences. Second, the paper will not reject the value-free ideal; rather, it will construe this ideal in a special way, not casting values aside in sciences, but bringing them to the table and rationally discussing them. Today’s predominant naturalistic view has tended to ‘naturalize’ values by looking for physicalist explanations for them—a move resisted by defenders of normativism in social sciences. At the same time, a contending ‘liberal naturalist’ stream has emerged, claiming that not all natural entities can be explained by the methods and concepts of physical sciences, and favors a non-materialist naturalism which includes mind, consciousness, meaning and value as fundamental parts of nature that cannot be reduced to matter. Hence, it may be posited that non-epistemic values could be ‘naturally’ included in the field of human sciences.

This paper sustains that reappraising Austrian economics in the light of Aristotelian ideas is not only possible but also fruitful. First, the paper draws a sketch of the essential features of Austrian economics. Next, it argues about the necessity for a thorough analysis of the notion of freedom, and it analyzes Mises's conception. Next, the paper exposes Aristotle's social, epistemological and economic thought related to Austrian main traits. An account of how the exercise of Aristotelian virtues may be synergic with economic coordination and a sketch of the consequences of the proposal on the teaching of economics are then provided. Finally, the conclusion shortly sums up the content and relevance of Aristotle's contribution.

En este trabajo se postula que se pueden establecer relaciones entre las diversas ‘visiones dei mundo’ (en sentido vulgar) y las teorías economicas, a través de las epistemologías subyacentes a las mismas. Se ilustra con las siguientes relaciones: entre la cosmovisión propia dei sistema de Aristóteles y su noción de economía, entre la matriz racionalista moderna y la economía clásica y neoclásica, a través del uso de analogías físicas y biologicas, y entre algunas posturas recientes y una vision post-moderna del mundo. Se busca fomentar una actitud crítica frente a las teorías e insistir en la necesidadde buscar siempre el camino epistemológico y metodológico adecuado al objeto de estudio.This paper tries to show the bridges between world visions (in a broad sense) and economic theories, through their underlying epistemological positions. The following relations are brought up: between Aristotle’s world vision and his concept of economics, between the modern rationalist frame and classical and neoclassical economics by the postulation of analogies from physics and biology, and finally between post-modern world vision and some current perspectives. The aim of the paper is to stress on the need of maintaining a critical position toward theories and also always looking for an adequate epistemological and methodological way

This article begins by pointing out the difficulties involved by the insertion of freedom in economics: It poses epistemological problems that are not satisfactorily solved by the standard theories. The article suggests that the Aristotelian epistemological frame of practical rationality may be an apt position from which one can deal with freedom in economics. Aristotle's concepts of society and economics are first introduced. The role of virtues in achieving economic coordination is exposed. Then the corresponding concept of practical science is described, showing its main characteristics and how they fit in with traditional political economy. The concept of value neutrality receives special attention in the article: A reinterpretation of the meaning of it is proposed. The article concludes that Aristotle's broad concepts of practical reason and science leave room for a more comprehensive notion of economics.

El revisionismo austríaco discutió la tesis de la historiografía económica clásica en torno a una supuesta incomprensión escolástica del mercado fundada en el “justo precio” y en la concepción aristotélica del valor, y vio en dicha concepción la raíz de la teoría subjetiva del valor sostenida por la primera generación de austríacos. Aquí mostramos, sin embargo, que los principales revisionistas austríacos realizaron una interpretación sesgada de la distinción entre valor de uso y valor de cambio en Aristóteles, e indicamos las claves esenciales en torno a las cuales debería girar la recuperación de la auténtica dimensión del valor económico en Aristóteles.

In recent times various books have suggested building a healthier economics on Aristotelian foundations. They often rely on Scott Meikle’s accurate study of Aristotle’s Economic Thought. For example, we can mention James Alvey’s A Short History of Ethics and Economics. The Greeks, Spencer Pack’s Aristotle, Adam Smith and Karl Marx, and Irene van Staveren’s The Values of Economics: An Aristotelian Perspective which stresses the need for inserting the values of justice, freedom and care into economics. Andrew Yuengert’s The Boundaries of Technique is based on Aristotle and Aquinas conceptions of human action. Yuengert has also published Approximating Prudence: Aristotelian Practical Wisdom and Economic Models of Choice. James Halteman and Edd Noell’s book about the relevance of ethics for economics, Reckoning with Markets also deals with Aristotle’s economic thought. The proposal of a new book of Robert and Edward Skidelsky, How Much is Enough? is also highly based on Aristotle’s notion of the good life. This paper will briefly detect what are the Aristotelian concepts mostly used by these authors and the reason why they are returning to Aristotle.

This book develops a philosophical analysis of economic reality and economic science from an Aristotelian point of view. It is the result of many years of thinking and philosophical study about these topics. It differs from other philosophy of economics books as it also deals with economic reality (not only the science) and approaches its subject from an Aristotelian perspective. It differs from other Aristotelian studies about economics as it covers the whole of philosophy of the economy. This book argues why Aristotle's thinking guarantees an appropriate interdisciplinary synthesis.

During the second half of the twentieth century, economics exported its logic - utility maximization - to the analysis of several human activities or realities: a tendency that has been called "economic imperialism". This book explores the concept termed by John Davis as "reverse imperialism", whereby economics has been seen in recent years to have taken in elements from other disciplines. Economics and Other Disciplines sheds light on the current state and possible future development of economics by focusing on it from a philosophical perspective, broadening the concept of rationality in economic theory. The beliefs that prevail in the world today make up a physicalist worldview. This book argues that this pervasive view is harmful for economics as a social science. Do new economic currents like behavioral economics, evolutionary economics, neuroeconomics, institutional economics, happiness economics, the capability approach and civil economy, escape this widespread mentality? What would be an adequate underlying economic ethos? Do these approaches fit into this ethos? Ricardo F. Crespo appraises the contributions from a classical philosophy angle, emphasizing their implications regarding practical reason. This volume is of great importance to those who are interested in political economy, economic theory and philosophy, as well as philosophy of social science.

Cet article défend l’idée que l’on peut distinguer quatre niveaux d’analyse au sein des sciences sociales (y compris l’économie) – à savoir, a) un niveau descriptif statistique, b) un niveau explicatif causal, c) un niveau explicatif téléologique, et d) un niveau téléologique prescriptif. Généralement, les sciences sociales ne considèrent que les niveaux a) et b). L’exclusion du niveau c) peut conduire à considérer comme des « anomalies » certains comportements qui ne sont pas compatibles avec des théories comme celle du choix rationnel ou celle de l’utilité espérée – à savoir, des théories qui adoptent une attitude dite de « rationalité instrumentale ». Inclure le niveau c) dans la réflexion implique de considérer la « rationalité pratique » et cela rend ces anomalies « raisonnables ». L’article prend pour cadre théorique la notion de causalité et la téléologie d’Aristote. La première section introduit ces notions, tandis que la deuxième section explore les points de vue contemporains sur la causalité et la téléologie. La troisième section introduit des arguments pour établir la légitimité de l’usage des valeurs en sciences sociales. Cette étape est nécessaire, car les causes finales des explications téléologiques dans le domaine des choses humaines sont bien, en définitive, des valeurs. Ces discussions ouvrent la voie à l’introduction, dans la quatrième et dernière section, des quatre niveaux analytiques susmentionnés. Plus précisément, dans le cas de l’économie, cette discussion se fonde sur la classification des disciplines économiques chez Carl Menger.

The world has seen several financial and economic crises in the past few years. Psychological, ethical and philosophical levels of causal analysis have been discussed, and in this context, an interest in classical thinkers has emerged. The work of Aristotle has influenced writers from Marx and Menger to Amartya Sen. This book introduces us to Aristotle's thought on 'the economic' and on its influences on economists. First, it focuses on Aristotle´s ideas, situating Aristotle in his historical context, describing his positions on the economic and analysing what kind of reality the economic is, its relation with ethics and with politics. Then, it determines what kind of science is concerned with the economic. Later, it analyses related topics and shows the influence of Aristotle's ideas on contemporary economists. It concludes by highlighting the Aristotelian contributions to today's economy. This scholarly volume offers important new insights into the Aristotelian approach to the economy itself, as well as to the idea of economics as a science, bringing Aristotle's views to bear on the modern economy.

The Nature and Method of Economic Sciences: Evidence, Causality, and Ends argues that economic phenomena can be examined from five analytical levels: namely, a statistical descriptive approach, a causal explanatory approach, a teleological explicative approach, a normative approach and, finally, the level of application. The above viewpoints are undertaken by different but related economic sciences, including statistics and economic history, positive economics, normative economics, and the 'art of political economy'. Typically, positive economics has analysed economic phenomena using the second approach, causally explaining and often trying to predict the future evolution of the economy. It has not been concerned with the ends selected by the individual or society, taking them as given. However, various new economic currents have emerged during the last 40 years, and some of these do assign a fundamental role to ends within economics. This book argues that the field of positive economics should adapt to deal with the issues that arise from this. The text attempts to discern the nature of economic phenomena, introducing the different approaches and corresponding economic sciences. It goes on to analyse the epistemological characteristics of these in the subsequent chapters, as well as their disciplinary inter-relations. This book is a valuable resource for students and scholars of the social sciences, philosophy, and the philosophy of economics. It will also be of interest to those researching political economy, and the development of economic thought.

El revisionismo austríaco discutió la tesis de la historiografía económica clásica en torno a una supuesta incomprensión escolástica del mercado fundada en el �justo precio� y en la concepción aristotélica del valor, y vio en dicha concepción la raíz de la teoría subjetiva del valor sostenida por la primera generación de austríacos. Aquí mostramos, sin embargo, que los principales revisionistas austríacos realizaron una interpretación sesgada de la distinción entre valor de uso y valor de cambio en Aristóteles, e indicamos las claves esenciales en torno a las cuales debería girar la recuperación de la auténtica dimensión del valor económico en Aristóteles