Skip to main content

Approval Theory and Social Contract

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
  • 209 Accesses

Part of the book series: Evolutionary Economics and Social Complexity Science ((EESCS,volume 20))

Abstract

This chapter’s basic theme is that of social philosophy: how is order in human society possible and what is the structure of its order? Naturally, the structure of social order relates to ethical problems in rules and duties. The author begins with a dispute over property and civil society in which he was involved in his twenties and sketches his scheme of mutual “approval” on property and ownership. He distinguishes the autonomous type and the synchronous (conformist) type of approval and follows the development of the relationships of both to the emergence of law and general economic media. Then, he applies the framework to the problematique of social contracts to determine its modern validity. He analyzes the structure of deontological ethics of Jürgen Habermas and Immanuel Kant from the perspective of approval theory.

Kiichiro Yagi, “Shakai Keiyaku kara Shonin no Riron he: Danpen teki Shiron (From Social Contract to the Theory of Recognition: Tentative Consideration),” Keizai-Ronso (The Economic Review), vol. 186, no. 3 (April 2013), pp. 1–14. Kyoto Daigaku Keizai Gakkai (Kyoto University Economic Society). (Partly used in Sect. 2.3).

Kiichiro Yagi, Trust and Sympathy in the Social and Market Order, Chapter 2 of Yuichi Shionoya and Kiichiro Yagi (eds.) Competition, Trust, and Cooperation: A Comparative Study, Heidelberg, Berlin, 2001, pp. 20–41. Spiegel Nature. (Used in an abridged way in Sect. 2.2).

Kiichiro Yagi, “A note on discourse ethics and naturalized social contract,” Evolutionary and Institutional Economics Review, vol, 15, no. 2 (December 2018), pp. 341–350. Japan Association for Evolutionary Economics. (Partly used in Sect. 2.4).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   69.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   89.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Marx (1859) regarded political economy as “the anatomy of civil society” (Marx 1961, S. 8). The thesis of the reconstruction of the “individual property” is in the conclusion of the first volume of Marx’s Capital (Marx 1867, S. 791, in English translation Marx 1954, p. 715).

  2. 2.

    On the origin and influence of this so-called “civil society” school of Marxism, see Barshay (2007).

  3. 3.

    The result of my investigation in this line was published in English as Yagi (2011).

  4. 4.

    See author’s recollections in Yagi (2018), which is included as appendices to Part I.

  5. 5.

    This is the abbreviation of the Studies in Economic Ethics and Philosophy. This workshop was organized by Peter Koslowski, then director of the Hannover Institute of Philosophical Research, for several years around 2000 and published the results from Springer.

  6. 6.

    We used the word “legitimation” to stress its normative nature. However, when its broader meaning includes sentimental consent, it is replaced by more straightfoward word “approval.”

  7. 7.

    In my former presentation in Yagi (2001), I used the expression “domination of agent i over j” (Dij), as the dominium was the original term of property/ownership in Western tradition. I changed it to “possession” (Pij) to express our agenda more precisely. However, in case that it contains personal control of i over j, I continue to use the term “domination.”

  8. 8.

    “every Man, that hath any Possession, or Enjoyment, of any part of the Dominations of any Government, doth thereby give his tacit Consent, and is as far forth obliged to Obedience to the Laws of that Government, during such Enjoyment, as any one under it; …” (Locke 1988, p. 348 §119).

  9. 9.

    In case the exchange of sympathy from both sides exist, it brings forth the situation of social exchange, which I discuss in the later chapter.

  10. 10.

    Another way of introduction of the “sympathy” into social theory is that of David Hume and Adam Smith. Though they did not deny the human nature to sympathize to fellow beings, they did not believe that the effect of “direct identification” is so strong to concur the selfish interest. Thus, their use of sympathy was more reflective that they would understand the utility of fellow beings by exchanging the position in their reflection. K. Binmore (1998, 2005) distinguished this sort of reflexive observation from the “direct identification” by naming it as “empathy.” D. Hume constructed his utilitarian theory on this ground, while A. Smith traced the development of the sentiment of “propriety” on the similar ground. See the following section.

  11. 11.

    Borrowed from Heath’s paraphrasing in English (Heath 2003, p. 227), in the original text, it is as follows: “daß die Folgen und Nebenwirkungen, die sich jeweils aus ihrer allgemeinen Befolgung für die Befriedigung der Interessen eines jeden Einzelnen (voaussichtlich) ergeben, von allen Betroffenen akzeptiert (und den Auswirkungen der bekannten alternativen Regelungsmöglichkeiten vorgezogen) werden können” (Habermas 2009, Bd. 3, S.60).

  12. 12.

    Borrowed from the English paraphrasing by Heath (2003, p. 212). In the original text, it is as follows: “Der Diskursethik zufolge darf eine Norm nudann Geltung beanspruchen, wenn alle von ihr möglicherweise Betroffenen als Teilnehmer eines praktischen Diskurses Einverständnis darüber erzielen (bzw. erzielen würden), daß diese Norm gilt” (Habermas 2009, Bd.3, S.60).

  13. 13.

    Translated by Thomas Kingsmill Abbott in 1895. In the German original, it is as follows: “Handle nur nach derjenigen Maxime, durch die Du zugleich wollen kannst, daß sie eine allgemeine Gesetz werde” (5939). “Handle so, als ob die Maxime deiner Hanslung durch deinen Willen zum allgemeinen Naturgesetz werfen sollte” (5944) (Kant, Grundlegung zur Metaphysik der Sitten, 1785, in kindle edition (Kant 1785)).

  14. 14.

    Yagi (2001). Here we use Aij (action of individual i toward other individual j) in place of Dij (domination of individual i over goods j), because the original formulation was invented to explain the relations of approval of ownership. See its introduction later in Sect. 2.3.

  15. 15.

    The case of the stag hunt and hare hunt has its origin in Rousseau’s Origin of Inequality (Rousseau 1755). In this case, hunters facing two Nash equilibria (Stag-Stag and Hare-Hare) are tempted to choose the latter to avoid a bad result.

  16. 16.

    Skyrms counted Binmore and Robert Sugden (Sugden 1986) as fellow Humeans in the direction of naturalizing social contracts (Skyrms 2012, p. 108).

  17. 17.

    The social contract as viewed in evolutionary social science covers all four areas of the proposed scheme. We should note that the two types of social contract that Rousseau described in his two articles entail the transmutation of the individual itself. While in the social contract that proceeds as civilization changes individuals from natural humans to civilized humans, in the ideal renovation of the social contract, individuals are reborn as citizens of the new nation state.

References

  • Apel K-O (1973) Transformation der Philosophie, 2 Bde. Suhrkamp, Frankfurt a.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barshay A (2007) The social sciences in modern Japan: the Marxian and modernist tradition. University of California Press, Berkeley

    Google Scholar 

  • Binmore K (1998) Just playing: game theory and the social contract II. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Binmore K (2005) Natural justice. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J. (1983) Diskursethik. Notizen zu einem Begründungsprogram. In Moralbewußtsein und Kommunikatives Handeln. Suhrkamp, Frankfurt a. M. Included in Habermas (2009), pp 31–115

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J. (2009) Philosophische Texte, Studienausgabe in 5 Bde. Bd.3, Diskursethik. Suhrkamp, Frankfurt a. M

    Google Scholar 

  • Heath J (2003) Communicative action and rational choice. The MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Heath J (2008) Following the rules: practical reasoning and deonticconstraint. Oxford university Press, Oxford

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hegel GWF (1807) System der Wissenschaft. Erster Theil: Die Phänomelogie des Geistes. Joseph Anton Goebhardt, Bamberg and Würzburg

    Google Scholar 

  • Hume D (1994) In: Haakonssen K (ed) Political essays. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Kant I (1785) Grundlegung zur Metaphysik der Sitten. J. F. Hartknoch, Riga. Included in Gesammelte Werke, idb 2015, Kindle ed

    Google Scholar 

  • Kant I (2016) Groundwork of the metaphysic of morals (trans: Abbott TK in 1895). Uploaded to Wikisource in 2016

    Google Scholar 

  • Locke J (1689) Two treatises of government. Awnsham Churchill, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Locke J (1988) Two treatises of government, edited with an introduction and notes by Peter Laslett. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Marx K (1859) Zur Kritik der politischen Ökonomie. Duncker, Berlin. (Included in Marx 1961)

    Google Scholar 

  • Marx K (1867) Das Kaoital. Kritik der politischen Oekonomie. Band 1: Der Produktionsprozess des Kapitals. Otto Meissner, Hamburg

    Google Scholar 

  • Marx K (1954) Capital. A critical analysis of capitalist production, vol 1. Progress Publisher, Moscow

    Google Scholar 

  • Marx K (1961) Zur Kritik der politischen Ökonomie (Original pub. in 1859), in Karl Marx – Friedrich Engels Werke, Band 13, Institut für Marxismus-Lenismus beim ZK der SED, Dietz Verlag, Berlin, 1961. (English translation, Marx 1904 and Marx 1970)

    Google Scholar 

  • Nozick R (1974) Anarchy, state, and Utopia. Basic Books, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Rawls J (1971) A theory of justice. Belknap, Cambridge MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Rousseau J-J (1755) Discours sur l’origine de L’inegalité parmi les hommes. Included in tome 1 Politique, Collection Complète des Oeuvres de J.-J. Rousseau, 1782, Genève: uploaded to Wikisource in 2017

    Google Scholar 

  • Rousseau J-J (1762) Le Contrat Social. Included in tome 1 Politique, Collection Complète des Oeuvres de J.-J. Rousseau, 1782: uploaded to Wikisource in 2017

    Google Scholar 

  • Rousseau J-J (1992) In: Masters RD, Kelly C (eds) Discourse on the origins of inequality (second discourse). Polemics, and political economy. The collected writings of Rousseau, vol 3. University Press of New England, Hanover

    Google Scholar 

  • Rousseau J-J (1997) In: Gourevitch V (ed) The social contract and other later political writings. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Skyrms B (2004) The stag hunt and the evolution of social structure. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Skyrms B (2012) Aspects of naturalizing the social contract. In: Aoki M, Binmore K, Deakin D, Gintis H (eds) Complexity and institutions: markets, norms and corporations, IEA conference volume no. 150-II. Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke, pp 107–120

    Google Scholar 

  • Sugden R (1986) The economics of cooperation, rights and welfare. Blakwell, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Yagi K (1977) “Shoyu Mondai to Keizai Riron” (Economic theory and the property problem). In: Aoki M (ed) Keizai Taisei-ron I: Keizagaku-teki Kiso (Economic systems I: foundation in economics). Toyo Keizai Shimposha, Tokyo, pp 261–293 (In Japanese)

    Google Scholar 

  • Yagi K (2001) Trust and sympathy in the social and market order. In: Shionoya Y, Yagi K (eds) Competition, trust, and cooperation: a comparative study. Springer, Berlin, pp 20–41

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Yagi K (2011) Austrian and German economic thought: from subjectivism to evolution. Routledge, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Yagi K (2018) Road to evolutionary and institutional economics in Japan: a personal memoire of the decade of founding the Japan Association for Evolutionary Economics. Evol Inst Econ Rev 15(1):1–9

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kiichiro Yagi .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Japan KK, part of Springer Nature

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Yagi, K. (2020). Approval Theory and Social Contract. In: Yagi, K. (eds) From Reproduction to Evolutionary Governance. Evolutionary Economics and Social Complexity Science, vol 20. Springer, Tokyo. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-4-431-54998-7_2

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics