The Elephant in the Room: On the Absence of Corporations in Bernard Hodgson's Economics as a Moral Science [Book Review]
Graduate studies at Western
Journal of Business Ethics 108 (1):27-35 (2012)
|Abstract||In his book Economics as a Moral Science , Bernard Hodgson argues that economics is not value neutral as is often claimed, but is a value-laden discipline. In the long argument for this in his book, Hodgson never discusses or even mentions corporations. This article explains that corporations are absent from Hodgson’s discussion because he considers only the consumption side of general equilibrium theory (GET), and it shows that if Hodgson had included corporations and the production side, his overall argument would have been more complete and convincing. This article shows that Hodgson’s methodology, when applied to the production side of GET, has value implications for CEOs of large corporations, for shareholders and members of Boards of Directors, and for legislators and regulators of business. Hodgson’s claim that economics must consider the ability of economic agents to create or change the institutional, cultural, and organizational conditions of their own economic actions is supported and expanded.|
|Keywords||Value-laden economics Corporations Economic theory Stockholder theory Moral science Neo-classical economics Rationality|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
David Geoffrey Holdsworth (2012). Economics and the Limits of Optimization: Steps Towards Extending Bernard Hodgson's Moral Science. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 108 (1):37-48.
Peter J. Boettke (1990). Individuals and Institutions. Critical Review 4 (1-2):10-26.
Dennis Badeen (2012). Bernard Hodgson's Trojan Horse Critique of Neoclassical Economics and the Second Phase of the Empiricist Level of Analysis. Journal of Business Ethics 108 (1):15-25.
John McMurtry (2003). The Life-Blind Structure of the Neoclassical Paradigm: A Critique of Bernard Hodgson's "Economics as a Moral Science". [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 44 (4):377 - 389.
Bernard Hodgson (1992). Rationality in Economics, Shaun Hargreaves Heap. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1989, Ix + 224 Pages. [REVIEW] Economics and Philosophy 8 (02):290-298.
Bernard Hodgson (1983). Economic Science and Ethical Neutrality: The Problem of Teleology. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 2 (4):237 - 253.
Paul C. Nystrom (1990). Differences in Moral Values Between Corporations. Journal of Business Ethics 9 (12):971 - 979.
Philip Mirowski (1995). Economics and Evolution, Geoffrey Hodgson. University of Michigan Press, 1993, Xi + 381 Pages. [REVIEW] Economics and Philosophy 11 (02):366-.
J. J. C. Smart (2005). Comments on Hodgson. Journal of Consciousness Studies 12 (1):58-64.
Shadworth H. Hodgson (1877). Mr. Hodgson on `Cogito Ergo Sum'. Mind 2 (5):126-130.
Shadworth H. Hodgson (1881). Letter of Dr. S. H. Hodgson. Journal of Speculative Philosophy 15 (3):320 - 322.
Bernard Hodgson (2005). Thinking and Acting Outside the Neo-Classical Economic Box: Reply to McMurtry. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 56 (3):289 - 303.
Michael J. Phillips (1992). Corporate Moral Personhood and Three Conceptions of the Corporation. Business Ethics Quarterly 2 (4):435-459.
Graham Cairns-Smith, Thomas W. Clark, Ravi Gomatam, Robert H. Kane, Nicholas Maxwell, J. J. C. Smart, Sean A. Spence & Henry P. Stapp (2005). Commentaries on David Hodgson's "a Plain Person's Free Will&Quot;. Journal of Consciousness Studies 12 (1):20-75.
John Coates (2003). The Orders of Discourse: Philosophy, Social Science, and Politics, John Gunnell. Rowman and Littlefield, 1998, XV+252 Pages. How Economics Forgot History: The Problem of Historical Specificity in Social Science, Geoffrey Hodgson. Routledge, 2001, XIX+422 Pages. [REVIEW] Economics and Philosophy 19 (2):377-383.
Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
Added to index2011-11-03
Total downloads1 ( #292,879 of 740,604 )
Recent downloads (6 months)0
How can I increase my downloads?