Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-v5vhk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-17T15:24:41.049Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

ON THE THINNESS OF THE UTILITARIAN DEFENSE OF PRIVATE PROPERTY

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 February 2010

JOSEPH PERSKY
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Why did classical utilitarian thinkers offer only a thin defense of the institution of private property? Utilitarians might have viewed such a defense as irrelevant, trivial, or impossible. A fourth hypothesis holds that utilitarians were ambivalent about the institution, itself. The utilitarians are clear on the relevance of a defense. Triviality would have to be based on 18th century philosophers and historians. Impossibility would raise serious questions about the utilitarian project. Ambivalence seems the most plausible explanation. Utilitarian writings throw considerable doubt on their own commitment to the strongest versions of the defense of private property.

Type
Research Articles
Information
Journal of the History of Economic Thought , Volume 32 , Issue 1 , March 2010 , pp. 63 - 83
Copyright
Copyright © The History of Economics Society 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Bentham, Jeremy. 1780. An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation. In Ryan, Alan, ed., Utilitarianism and Other Essays. London: Penguin Books, 1987.Google Scholar
Bentham, Jeremy. 1843a. Principles of the Civil Code. In Bowring, John, ed., The Works of Jeremy Bentham. Edinburg: William Tait, 1843. Accessed from http://oll.libertyfund.org/title/2009 on 2008-04-01.Google Scholar
Bentham, Jeremy. 1843b. A Manual of Political Economy. In Bowring, John, ed., The Works of Jeremy Bentham. Edinburg: William Tait, 1843. Accessed from http://oll.libertyfund.org/title/2009 on 2008-04-01.Google Scholar
Crimins, James. 2002. “Bentham and Hobbes: An Issue of Influence.” Journal of the History of Ideas 63 (4): 677–696.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gibbon, Edward. 1776. The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, edited by Bury, J. B.. New York: Fred de Fau & Co., 1906, Vol. 7. Accessed from http://oll.libertyfund.org/title/1374 on 2008-04-01.Google Scholar
Helvetius, Claude Adrien. 1772. A Treatise on Man, translated by Hooper, W.. New York: Burt Franklin, 1777, 1810, reprinted 1969.Google Scholar
Hirschmann, Albert. 1991. The Rhetoric of Reaction. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hobbes, Thomas. 1660. Leviathan, edited by Tuck., RichardCambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996.Google Scholar
Hont, Istvan. 2005. Jealousy of Trade. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Hume, David. 1740. A Treatise of Human Nature, edited by Selby-Bigge., L. A.New York: Oxford University Press, 1978.Google Scholar
Hume, David. 1748. “Of the Original Contract.” Essays Moral Political and Literary. In The Philosophical Works of David Hume. Edinburgh: Adam Black and William Tait, 1826, Vol. 3. Accessed from http://oll.libertyfund.org/title/1483 on 2008-04-01.Google Scholar
Hume, David. 1751. An Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Morals. http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/etext03/nqpmr10.txt.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hume, David. 1778. The History of England from the Invasion of Julius Caesar to the Revolution in 1688. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund, 1983. Accessed from http://oll.libertyfund.org/title/1868 on 2008-04-01.Google Scholar
Locke, John. 1690. Two Treatises of Government, edited by Laslett., PeterCambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988.Google Scholar
McCloskey, Deirdre. 1998. The Rhetoric of Economics, 2nd edition. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
Malthus, Thomas Robert. 1798. An Essay on the Principle of Population, 1st edition. The On-Line Library of Liberty.Google Scholar
Medearis, John. 2005. “Labor, Democracy, Utility, and Mill’s Critique of Private Property.” American Journal of Political Science 49 (1): pp. 135–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mill, James. 1820. “On Government.” Encyclopedia Britannica. http://www.mdx.ac.uk/WWW/STUDY/xmilgov.htmGoogle Scholar
John Stuart, Mill. 1824. Autobiography. In Robson, John M. and Stillinger, Jack, eds., The Collected Works of John Stuart Mill, Volume I—Autobiography and Literary Essays. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1981. Accessed from http://oll.libertyfund.org/title/242/7718/716255 on 2008-03-06.Google Scholar
John Stuart, Mill. 1848. Principles of Political Economy. In Robson, John M., ed., The Collected Works of John Stuart Mill, Volume II. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1981. Accessed from http://oll.libertyfund.org/title/242/7718/716255 on 2008-03-06.Google Scholar
John Stuart, Mill. 1867. “Bentham.” Dissertations and Discussions. In Ryan, Alan, ed., Utilitarianism and Other Essays. London: Penguin Books, 1987.Google Scholar
John Stuart, Mill. 1874. “Nature.” In Robson, John M., ed., The Collected Works of John Stuart Mill, Volume X—Essays on Ethics, Religion, and Society. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1985. Accessed from http://oll.libertyfund.org/title/241/21521 on 2008-04-01.Google Scholar
John Stuart, Mill. 1879. “Thornton on Labour and Its Claims.” Chapters on Socialism. In Robson, John M., ed., The Collected Works of John Stuart Mill, Volume V—Essays on Economics and Society Part II. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1967. Accessed from http://oll.libertyfund.org/title/232/16749/733519 on 2008-03-06.Google Scholar
Paley, William. 1785. The Principles of Moral and Political Philosophy, with foreword by Mahieu, D. L.Indianapolis: Liberty Fund, 2002.Google Scholar
Peart, Sandra and Levy, David. 2005. The ‘Vanity of the Philosopher.’ Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robertson, William. 1777. The History of America. In The Historical and Other Works. Edinburgh: Thomas Nelson, 1847.Google Scholar
Ryan, Alan. 1984. Property and Political Theory. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Schliesser, Eric. 2006. “Articulating Practices as Reasons: Adam Smith on the Social Conditions of Possibility of Property.” In Brown, Vivienne, ed., The Adam Smith Review, Volume 2, pp. 69–97.Google Scholar
Shabas, Margaret. 2006. The Natural Origins of Economics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Smith, Adam. 1759. The Theory of Moral Sentiments, edited by Haakonssen., KnudCambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, Adam. 1776. The Wealth of Nations, edited by Cannan., EdwinNew York: Modern Library, 1937.Google Scholar
Stephen, Leslie. 1900. The English Utilitarians. London: Duckworth and Co. (reprinted London: The London School of Economics and Political Science, 1950).Google Scholar
Tuck, Richard. 1996. “Introductory Essay.” In Tuck, Richard, ed., Hobbes, Thomas, Leviathan. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996.Google Scholar