Social and Behavioral Sciences Commons^™

Political Economy, Sandra J. Peart, David M. Levy

Jepson School of Leadership Studies articles, book chapters and other publications

Political economy describes how human societies are organized by exchange. The critical issue for political economists is the interaction between self-directed decision making and the incentives that turn decisions into approved outcomes. In this interaction, political economists see a key role for leadership, a role that depends upon our common concern for others (Robbins, 1981). There are three roles, then, for leadership in the political economist’s model: self-directed decision making, incentive making, and establishing the criteria for approved outcomes.

Adam Smith And The Place Of Faction, Sandra J. Peart, David M. Levy

Jepson School of Leadership Studies articles, book chapters and other publications

Our approach to faction focuses on Smith’s account of the interrelation between social distance and small group cohesion. We make the case that social distance is not necessarily constant in Smith’s system. As social distance shrinks, sympathy becomes more habitual and the affection we have for others increases (Peart and Levy, 2005b). Factions reduce social distance, and this gives them power and makes them dangerous. By modifying social distance, they created a disconnect between behavior of which we approve (cooperation) and consequences of which we disapprove. It is in this context that we find virtuous behavior with deleterious consequences. The …

2008 Hes Presidential Address: We're All "Persons" Now: Classical Economists And Their Opponents On Marriage, The Franchise, And Socialism, Sandra J. Peart

Jepson School of Leadership Studies articles, book chapters and other publications

My purpose is to paint a broad brush narrative—it will have some visual representations as well—of how nineteenth-century political economists and their critics confronted a set of basic and related questions: Are men and women equally capable of self governance? Are they equally able to decide when and whom to marry and how many children to have? Can they be trusted equally to cast a ballot? Is their right to property inviolate or might new arrangements be designed and adopted for the production and distribution of wealth?

This is a story interwoven with extraordinary characters: John Stuart Mill will be …

Theory, Application And The Canon: The Case Of Mill And Jevons, Sandra J. Peart

Jepson School of Leadership Studies articles, book chapters and other publications

Whatever disputes remain about the nature and content of the "canon" of economics, it is widely accepted that the boundary of economic science was narrowed throughout the nineteenth century (Winch 1972). This chapter offers a partial explanation for that narrowing in the methodological developments that occurred during the second half of the century. For reasons of practicality in the face of pronounced "multiplicity of cause," John Stuart Mill called, In his 1836 Essay On the Definition of Political Economy; and on the Method of Investigation Proper to It, and again in his 1843 Logic, for a separate …

A Rejoinder To Abraham Hirsch, Samuel Hollander, Sandra J. Peart

Jepson School of Leadership Studies articles, book chapters and other publications

The dispute between Hollander and Peart, and Hirsch, turns on the nature and role of verification in Mill’s perception of the appropriate method for Political Economy. Professor Hirsch maintains against us that, for Mill, the models constructed by political economists are insulated from verification. His case is based on two counterclaims. First, that when Mill writes of “verification” in Book III of the Logic, he has in mind a procedure differing from that appropriate for Political Economy, which allows only “indirect verification” (outlined in Book VI). Hirsch finds that Hollander and Peart confuse the two. Secondly, since the contexts …

John Stuart Mill's Method In Principle And In Practice: A Review Of The Evidence, Samuel Hollander, Sandra J. Peart

Jepson School of Leadership Studies articles, book chapters and other publications

We believe an additional, and contrasting, interpretation of Mill’s method is supported by the evidence. For in our view Mill insisted on the possibility of theory modification in the light of inadequacies revealed by empirical evidence, and also held that the central behavioral axiom is not of universal relevance but is pertinent only to the local circumstances of contemporary Great Britain and America—and, even so, qualified as we shall see—that axiom itself is empirically based. On our reading, there is more in common between his research strategy and that of Milton Friedman than is sometimes granted, at least when Friedman’s …