ISSN: 2641-9130
Authors: Alves Costa T*
The mainstream view of the twentieth century suggests that Adam Smith made a tout court defense of laissez-faire and a pure rational calculation of Economics. However, I consider this a biased interpretation that ignores an integrated reading of his works, The Theory of Moral Sentiments (1759) and Wealth of Nations (1776). In opposition to this dominant view, I propose - as a methodological strategy - a systematic analysis of Smith’s thought that encompasses the moral, economic, and political dimensions in what I call a tripartite theory. Although these three dimensions are connected, I argue the moral dimension is the Archimedean point of his theory, since Smith’s system is based on the moral sentiment of sympathy. From the moral point of view, sympathy is understood as a kind of “organic connection†between people, for it allows the individual to put himself in another’s place using the device of the imagination. Through this movement, it is possible to feel, to some extent, how another feels, enabling self-knowledge and the recognition of the other as an equal. From an economic point of view, I need to keep in mind that one of the fundamental points of Smith’s theory is the understanding that self-interest cannot be considered only the feeling that moves interpersonal relationships. There is the feeling of mutual trust, which is a condition for commercial relations and economic progress. The political dimension excels in virtuous societies and, for that, requires cooperative subjects and fair behavior. The need for sympathy occurs, in this sphere, with a view to promoting the recognition of the other that generates individuals morally engaged in cooperating. In the end, I intend to defend that the sympathetic liberalism that I find in Smith’s tripartite vision is a political model capable of contributing to promote a prosperous society.
Keywords: Moral; Economy; Politics; Sympathy; Tripartite theory
