The book investigates the many ways that economic and moral reasoning interact, overlap and conflict both historically and at present. The book explores economic and moral thinking as a historically contingent pair using the concept of economic normativities. The contributors use case studies including economic practices, such as trade and finance and tax and famine reforms in the British colonies to explore the intellectual history of how economic and moral issues interrelate.

How modern economics abandoned classical liberalism and lost its way Milton Friedman once predicted that advances in scientific economics would resolve debates about whether raising the minimum wage is good policy. Decades later, Friedman’s prediction has not come true. In Where Economics Went Wrong, David Colander and Craig Freedman argue that it never will. Why? Because economic policy, when done correctly, is an art and a craft. It is not, and cannot be, a science. The authors explain why classical liberal economists understood this essential difference, why modern economists abandoned it, and why now is the time for the profession to return to its classical liberal roots. Carefully distinguishing policy from science and theory, classical liberal economists emphasized values and context, treating economic policy analysis as a moral science where a dialogue of sensibilities and judgments allowed for the same scientific basis to arrive at a variety of policy recommendations. Using the University of Chicago—one of the last bastions of classical liberal economics—as a case study, Colander and Freedman examine how both the MIT and Chicago variants of modern economics eschewed classical liberalism in their attempt to make economic policy analysis a science. By examining the way in which the discipline managed to lose its bearings, the authors delve into such issues as the development of welfare economics in relation to economic science, alternative voices within the Chicago School, and exactly how Friedman got it wrong. Contending that the division between science and prescription needs to be restored, Where Economics Went Wrong makes the case for a more nuanced and self-aware policy analysis by economists.

Contributing to a better understanding of contemporary issues of environmental sustainability from a historical perspective, this book provides a cohesive and cogent account of the history of ecological economic thought. The work unearths a diverse set of ideas within a Western and Slavic context, from the Renaissance and the Enlightenment to the late 1940s, to reveal insights firmly grounded in historiographical research and of import for addressing current sustainability challenges, not least by means of improving our grasp on how humans and nature can generously coexist in the long term. The history of ecological economic thought offered in this volume is rich and diverse, encompassing views that are bound by the observance of the tenets of the natural sciences, but which differ significantly in terms of the role of energy and materials to cultural development and the normative aspects involving resource distribution, social ideals, and policy-making. Combining the approaches of independent scholarly figures and scientific communities from different historical periods and nationalities, the book brings elements that are still missing in the scarce literature on the history of ecological economic thought and highlights the underlying threads which unite such initiatives. The book brings a fresh look into the historical development of ecological economic ideas and will therefore be of great interest to scholars and students of ecological economics, environmental economics, sustainability science, interdisciplinary studies, and history of economic thought.

The Nature and Method of Economic Sciences: Evidence, Causality, and Ends argues that economic phenomena can be examined from five analytical levels: 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 interrelations. 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.

A clear and concise history of economic thought, developed from the author's award-winning book, The Wealth of Ideas.

This book examines the role of normative economics in the writings of Karl Marx, Ludwig von Mises, Milton Friedman and Karl Popper. The book shows that while distinguishing positive from normative economics can be helpful, this distinction should not minimize the importance of normative economics or reject the possibility of offering objective evaluations of social phenomena and policies in normative economics. The book offers a critical assessment of the attempts by Marx, Mises and Friedman to reduce scientific economics to the positive analysis of social phenomena alone. Through a meticulous analysis of their work, the book shows that their positive theories fail to justify their evaluations of economic phenomena and policies. The book then draws on the writings of Popper to maintain that we should place normative economics at the center of economics. The book argues that normative economics can choose the norms underlying its evaluations of social situations and policies objectively and relies on some of Popper’s ideas to offer some criteria that can facilitate the selection of these norms. The book will be of interest to economists, historians of economic thought, philosophers of economics and political theorists and philosophers.