Abstract

In recent years, scholars have increasingly emphasized the reliance of Adam Smith’s moral theory on the virtues. This essay argues that Smith’s account of the virtues differs from most virtue theories because his must be read through the construct of the impartial spectator. Smith’s spectator bears what Emmanuel Levinas might call a “trace” of the transcendent and employs what Amartya Sen calls an “open impartiality,” which is an impartiality not bound to any social group. As the essay explores how Smith deploys the virtues, it shows that his deeper concern is not with the virtues but with how people respond to the market, their neighbors, and the structure of the world. It shows how H. Richard Niebuhr’s concept of responsibility can be a helpful lens for understanding Smith’s moral and economic approaches.