Essay Sample on Sidgwick's Economic Ideas: Exploring Ethics in an Economic World

Introduction

Sidgwick, an economic thinker, wrote several books expressing his ideas of life. He wrote about many topics like ethics, politics, education, religion, parapsychology, and epistemology, among others concerning economics. Narrowing to ethics, the writer state that it is through the need to meet economic needs that come moral degradation. He adds that plunders exist because of the urge to satisfy their economic needs. Although Sidgwick does not postulate that plundering is allowed, he says the only way to stop this moral aggression is by educating people about the harm these actions cause. Borrowing from other writers' ideas, economic ethics are critical and are part of our daily life that we cannot escape. However, learning how to deal with ethical issues paramount. This paper is an analysis of Sidgwick's economic, ethical ideas and methods and what other economists think about the same.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Meaning of Economic Ethics

Sidgwick closely related economic with religion while talking about ethics. He believed that morals are Godly and that whatever happens is regarding God's will and purpose. Every person should be persuaded alongside their way of thinking. Consequently, if preachers wish to hold over the most educated people, they must reveal unreserved, sincerity and exactness in their words just as scientists show in their exploration of laws of nature. Even if the economist did not want to criticize the church directly, he certainly directed his efforts to utilitarianism and objectiveness. While thinking in the line of happiness, Sidgwick stated that any action which alters the level of happiness is what defines wrong and right. The writer classified ethics as either economic or religious. He further gave three methods through which explains economic ethics. The methods are utilitarianism, egoism and intuitional morality ('Stanford Encyclopedia,' 2019). Accordingly, the economist believes that utilitarianism is the strongest theory of ethics. According to O'Donnell (1993), Sidgwick believed that he always practiced utilitarianism in. On the same, he objectively reviews the Kant's ideas of utilitarianism. Both Immanuel Kant and Sidgwick agree on some ideas that are seen as morally wrong or right.

Source of Molarity

According to Rima (2001), the desire for wealth is what leads to immorality. The economist borrows this idea from the Chinese and Hindus traditional belief that wealth is associated with evil. Without human needs, there would be no economy, and without human deeds, there would be no ethics (Rima, 2001). Hebrews believe in an oriental philosophy which states that happiness is not dependent on wealth. However, Hebrews are said to follow the doctrines left by the prophets and Moses. These doctrines do not allow individuals to yearn for wealth as that would be considered immorality. Therefore, they believe that economy is not related to ethics. Moral values are mostly dependent on the economic class an individual belongs to (Landreth & Colander, n.d). That further means that poor people are likely to be morally upright compared to the rich. Part of this observation is correct but not purely accurate.

On the other hand, Sidgwick asserts that a person's moral values are not solely determined by their standard of living but also by their religious beliefs. The economist says that religion and economy shape the behaviour of a person. The two factors determine the levels in which an individual is willing to go to find the basic needs. He adds that people who are from a religious background are less likely to engage in immoral acts compared to those from a background without religious history.

Methods of Ethics

Utilitarianism

Utilitarianism is the most vital method of ethics ('Stanford Encyclopedia,' 2019). The basic purpose of this method is similar to that of Kant. However, Sidgwick disagrees with Kant on several measures of utilitarianism. He separates the issue of reasoning from the practical basis of Kantianism. He disagrees with the critical philosophy applied in the Kantianism. Sidgwick treats the question of rationalism as a huge answerable fact that should be referred personally or individually. Therefore, by refusing to base his morality values on reasoning alone, he deviates from Kant's philosophical knowledge of ethics. However, Kantianism is the central idea Sidgwick had while explaining utilitarianism. Amongst economists, Sidgwick's theory of ethics is very controversial. Rima (2001) stated that Sidgwick's arguments would be understandable if only he indicates that a person could have good reasoning but not be morally upright. Accordingly, this would mean that if a person had a valid reason to do wrong, it was ethically right.

On the contrary, various authors find this method more confusing. Sidgwick was known to not lean on one side of truth but while not aware might have leaned on the immoral side of life. Scientists purely rely on facts that could be proven. Similarly, Sidgwick claimed that his philosophy for the reasoning of happiness could be proven upon investigations. Consequently, more controversy is found in his interpretation of what is good and right. According to economists, good acts that bring happiness are considered as utilitarianism (Rima, 2001).

Intuitionism

Conformity with actions like promise-keeping and truth-telling is what brings an end to moral actions because these duties come automatically and come along with valid intuitions ('Stanford Encyclopedia,' 2019). Intuitionism is the second method of ethics and is treated as the most fundamental principle. Sidgwick explains that even though people think that conscience gives immediate judgment against various acts, a view he names as ultra-intuitionism does not always correspond as expected. While regarding morality as the most common sense of a sound mind, philosophical intuitionism attempts to find more principles from the obvious truths. Landreth and Colander, (n.d) agree with Sidgwick that intuitionism is based on common sense. The two economists explain that while meeting economic needs, it is common sense to do what is right. Common sense, in this case, is what defines ethics. Culturally accepted practices use common sense.

For this reason, it would be ignorant if a person is trying to do the opposite of what others do. Even if doing what others do not do would be considered unique and exceptional, it is unethical to deviate from cultural practices (Landreth & Colander, n.d). From the history of economics, economic needs often define the morality of individuals. Besides, they apply intuitions in their actions which could either be aggressive or friendly. Sidgwick adds that observing rules or dong the right thing distinguishes good from bad intuitions.

Egoism

A utilitarian who embrace egoism is considered immoral ('Stanford Encyclopedia,' 2019). According to Sidgwick, self-interest is the source of all evils. Thinking from the utilitarianism perspective, most people who have fallen from the moral paths put their needs first. In doing so, selfish individuals will do anything that is to their benefits, even if it hurts others. An egoist would be willing to help other people so long as he or she has a self-interest within. Humanity is observed where people help others because they are in need. Also, if people go out of their way to meet other people's needs, it is not considered much as generosity but as humanity. Egoism as a method of economic ethics reasons that if an individual would help others so long as he benefits from the act that is not humanity but self-centeredness. Sidgwick states that most politicians are egoistic; they are willing to help their voters so long as they vote for them (O'Donnell, 1993).

To finale, Sidgwick's economic ethics theory is balanced. His ideas are somewhat correct, and others off-base. While speaking about utilitarianism, the thinker asserts that the source of morality is based on reasoning and not necessarily what is right. Ethically, doing what is right is more fulfilling than doing what is good. An action could seem good but not right based on the application of various principles. The economist's intuitionism and egoism methods are perfect. I believe that his representation of the methods is based on truth and facts. In general, Sidgwick, being involved in the various philosophical controversy, ascertain that he is a deep thinker. Also, his basis of reasoning on the sources of morality is on a higher level. I think that the economist expressed his ethical ideas from the generational perspective. Consequently, his tenderness in judging people's actions is based on what his generation was behaving. Therefore, if Sidgwick was writing about economic ethics today, he could have different views following the behavior of the current generation.

References

Landreth, H., & Colander, D. C. (n.d.). History of Economic Thought.

O'Donnell, M. G. (1993). Economics as ethics: Bastiat's nineteenth-century interpretation. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF01845787

Rima, I. H. (2001). Development of economic analysis

Stanford Encyclopedia. (n.d.). Henry Sidgwick (Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy). Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/sidgwick/