The Ethical Constraint

Abstract

On the one hand there is Mandeville on the selfishness that succeeds: ‘Pride and Vanity have built more hospitals than all the Virtues together.’ (Mandeville, 1714:1, 261). On the other hand there is Marx on communism beyond shirking and greed: ‘Only then can the narrow horizon of bourgeois right be left fully behind and society inscribe on its banners: from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.’ (Marx, 1875:566). In the middle there is Adam Smith: ‘How selfish soever man may be supposed, there are evidently some principles in his nature, which interest him in the fortune of others, and render their happiness necessary to him, though he derives nothing from it, except the pleasure of seeing it.’ (Smith, 1759:3). Stranded on the middle ground, what the pragmatic Smith expected from human nature in all its complexity was a balance between self-love and benevolence, a mixed orientation that made modern capitalism other-regarding even as the wealth of nations was dependent upon gain-seeking and competition.