I promised, threatened, or if you prefer, in the June 27 post on the site UGDC the imminent publication of Bari and Trani ( http://www.ugdcbarietrani.it / ) for some considerations related to the view of ethics as a solution to the imbalances of welfare economics. Pending publication on the official website, due to technical problems web manager, reproduce below in full and the reflections of the case.
has given me amazing to see how the illustrious thinkers very far apart, especially for education, can, however, get very close to conclusions when dealing with the problem and make it less harsh to mitigate the imbalances , is now firmly entrenched in the global economic system. The common denominator of the fractions is the equalizing and always moral philosophy and ethics embodied by its highest expression. I refer to the thin thread that I, personally, put in a symbiotic connection Amartya K. Sen (pictured above), Giovanni Bazoli and Ludwig Raiser.
certainly needs no introduction Amartya K. Sen (Nobel Prize for Economics in 1998), who, sailing, in a glossy impressionatamene, between Marxism and liberalism, has tried to reconcile ethics and economics, through a revision that brings with it the enrichment of ' welfare economics "simply" paying more attention to moral philosophy (Ethics and Economics, published by Laterza 2002). The Indian economist complained about the strong separation between economics and ethics: the fracture is to be considered among the major deficiencies of contemporary economic theory. The heart of philosophical and economic Sen is the note that the actual behavior of humans is influenced by the ethical evaluations, and still one of the main tasks of ethics is precisely to influence and affect human behavior (the "conception of reasons related to ' ethics "), obvious, therefore, that the theory of welfare economics must be able to have some positive influence in relation to human behavior and, CONSEQUENTIAL, be justifiably influential on contemporary economic theory, based on the principles of logistics (also called engineering approach to the economy, developed among others by the engineer Léon Walras French economist of the nineteenth century).
Sen argues that "the economy has had two quite different origins, both related to politics, but in very different ways, involved with regard to ethics on the one hand, and what might be called the engineering on the other." The engineering approach is denoted by an interest in essentially logistical issues rather than the ultimate ends and such questions as: what would promote "human good" or "how one should live." The purposes are given almost for granted, not investigated well, and commitment to economic theory based on this approach is aimed at finding appropriate means to achieve them. "Human behavior," says Sen, "is typically seen as based on mere simple and easy to characterize." It 'good to point out, to avoid misunderstandings, the economist does not undermine the fundamental contribution to the modern economy logistical approach, but rather enhances the angle fruitful in studying the social interdependence and to clarify various practical problems: the rest of the development of formal theory of general equilibrium is a good example, so that the author brings out the applications and extensions "causal analysis tragically real problems of hunger and famine in the modern world." What Sen has said that the economy, as it has come establishment, may be made more productive approach than the mere logistics of course, paying more and more explicit attention to ethical considerations in the conduct and the human judgments are informed "is not my goal," he says, "to eliminate what has been achieved or is achieving, but rather ask for more." This operation is necessary because "the importance of ethics has been weakened quite substantially as they evolved the modern economy." To reach this result must, however, first recognize that the hypothesis is extremely claustrophobic, behavior driven by self-interest in economics has been a major obstacle in the analysis of relationships that may, however, proved highly significant: the predominant theory, in fact, treats the rationality of human behavior with the internal consistency of choice and the maximization of self-interest. Sen, however, note, and contained perhaps the most important of the statements here, that there is no firm evidence of either the principle that the rational maximization of individual interest (so-called "economic man") provides the best approximation of actual human behavior (So \u200b\u200bhe takes the form of a postulate, then, that a test called the scientific rigor), nor even that it is capable of leading, necessarily, in the direction of the best economic advantage. Well, despite the proponents of that link are not causative missed in the past and not lacking, to say the truth, even today (read eg George Stigler), following the trail of the words of the Nobel Prize, we can say that "to see any removal by maximization of self as evidence of irrationality is to deny a role in the actual ethical decision-making. " On the empirical claims economist India are a good side in the experience of Japan, where a "systematic expulsion from the behavior driven by self-direction in the sense of duty, loyalty and good will has played a substantial role in the industrial success" in the two words '"Japanese ethos" (as defined by Michio Morishima), or the complex input / output behavior can hardly be regimented into the concept of personal interest. The question is, therefore, the whole point, that "if there are multiple reasons, or whether it is the only self-interest to guide human beings" as it will be understood from the foregoing that the wealth of ethical considerations in this assessment related to social welfare has a direct influence on personal behavior, and "stick to the narrow and totally implausible assumption of a behavior driven solely by self-interest seems to take a shortcut only apparent since going to emerge in a different place than where we wanted to go. " The complex economic and philosophical reasoning followed by Amartya K. Sen brings to bear, without doubt give recipes for a disease is diagnosed, but still to study and improve, we should look closer and intense contact between ethics and economics, which should help contact Disposable "a deeper light on the relationship between personal interest and behavior." In conclusion it is important to highlight the contact in question would, almost by pinocytosis, with useful ethics.
analysis Bazoli John (President of Banca Intesa and Professor of Administrative Law at the Faculty of Economics, Catholic University of Milan), one of the most fertile and lively minds of Italian Catholicism, starting with the enthusiasm that has led to export to the "global village" liberal democracy, to inspire the political and military choices and then crash-landed on the consequences and the dramatic events of recent years, is based on finding "that would run the risk the lives of each of us and the scary scenarios that are outlined for future generations if it had reconsidered and corrected the approach taken by the process of globalization over the last decade of the twentieth century" (Market and inequality, published by Morcelliana of Brescia in 2006).
If we focus our attention on the economic aspects of the globalized world will not escape, the careful observer, noting a lack of democracy in the dominant economic system, said today's market, first identified as capitalism, a deficiency that leads strongly to the fore issue of identification of remedies and solutions be taken. Hard to believe, but precisely in the historical phase in which the opposition has failed for two blocks, or between political and economic systems and Western Communists, on the increased efficiency and productivity demonstrated by the "open" systems market, has dramatically appalesata the fracture of the balance between the economic market and political democracy, which seemed to match, however, seem to be inseparable. But what has happened, what happened exactly? Well, Professor Bazoli answers to the above question claiming that the fallen walls of division between east and west, the streets were macadam world with the principles of market and this operation has been just one scenario and global world, but at that precise moment that the bond-market democracy has given way, and has been questioned since proved unable to redress the huge inequalities between the different and specific regions of our planet. Indeed the differences and asymmetric social and economic, even under the higher speed which information travels, are now seen more clearly and consciously by all. The Secretary-General Kofi Annan stressed that "the model of development we are accustomed to has been convenient for the few, but disastrous for many. A road to prosperity that disrupts the environment and leaves the majority of humanity in squalor will soon prove to be a dead end for everyone. " This scenario should lead to a new perspective to assess the relationship between democracy and the market, both from a genuinely international perspective as from the perspective of individual states, unless you want to meet a risk of regression and heavy crisis democracies. The comparison between democracy and the market must then be on a value level, this is the approach of Bazoli, and, therefore, must start from the observation that modern political democracies are based on two main principles: recognition of the rights of liberty and 'affirmation of equality before the law for all citizens. If these principles are the generative matrix of democracy can be said that they are also free-market economy? Answering this question involves finding the key to the problem of the problem that concerns us here. Freedom was perhaps the link, the common bond, as defined above, which has held together for so long a market economy with democracy and, therefore, it is certainly true that both are animated by that principle, but can you say same argument even further first introduced? In other words, the equality in the sense ethically substantive, not merely formal, is a value common to both systems? How many applications for one simple answer that the professor gives us yet, "because there is a correction of the globalization process should apply a discipline capable of imposing respect for the values \u200b\u200bso far sacrificed." E ', then, the value sacrificed substantial equality, the breaking point between democracy and market economy. How close Bazoli and Sen can be intuited by a statement of the first, second, which is considered unacceptable from an economic theory "that addresses and reasons for the interest and selfish motivation which exclusively or primarily in the field of human resources". We'll be back soon on this issue, but I like to stress immediately as it is extraordinary that two economists quite distant for cultural education, and I think for rebuttable presumption even religion, have come to conclusions identical starting conditions, the study of angles and perspectives of different problem. Returning to the setting of the President of Banca Intesa, this is the great challenge of modern democracies to the market, both on the playing field internationally, is, we need to emphasize again, in the interior areas of each country: to try to balance the economic relations in the direction equity, promoting the conditions for achieving new spaces for freedom and equality essentially agreed. E ', therefore, on this table who plays the game: the challenge is to remove situations of social injustice by the market economy and the premium is too obvious, but the dealer can not do the political world. This is because the powers that be are becoming more and biunivocally inextricably linked to the economic interests of the agencies that sponsor them, either because they prefer the law of force to the force of law does not pay, as claimed Bazoli. There is a need for new rules imposed by democracy, and once considered inappropriate in the volunteer force field, it must be equalizing the tax law as a constraint to be observed in the conduct of economic activity.
arbitration This task should be entrusted to supranational authorities, which are able to interpret the various bodies and interests in the field, defining the procedures Financo penalties for violations of legal obligations and to enforce the rules of a global market. "The principle of solidarity," as written by Archbishop Bruno Forte, Archbishop of Chieti-Vasto, commenting on the work of Professor Bazoli, "should be understood in relation to goods of general interest, as a true legal obligation to respect and not only as moral orientation of attention. The ethical challenge is in fact equal to the gravity of the stakes: the question of how many will be willing to accept it can not do not worry everyone, as the duty to spend it can not fail to concern us all. " Of course it would not be realistic if Bazoli not admit that this path supra, combining economic development and democratic values, is still far from being verified, but that does not mean that there are no other roads, already crossed to get there, possibly as soon as possible , hoped that objective.
Its look and applaud his efforts are intended to bring forward by individuals, groups of traders and individual dall'associazionismo that are designed to follow the ethical rules of conduct and solidarity. There is one who does not detract from this reality, so denying the presence an intermediate zone between rules and ethics as they guided the behavior of both individuals and communities. It is in this area, however, that the willing hands of those who, sensing the moral inadequacy of the existing rules of law, scraping the top layer composed of fragments from ethics mean that he can peel off and then germinate in the lower layer inhabited by law. The path of law, whether it is rightly argues Bazoli, ethics is always prepared ... that this lesson! More disappointing, however, the conclusion of Bazoli: according to the economist, the believer, more than others, can not settle for mere compliance with legal rules and professional lives that accompany the democratic and economic, on the grounds that the believer is required pluris quid, a supplement of generosity, moral commitment and attention and respect to the reasons and the rights of others, especially in the field of human dignity . Well, I find this statement is absolutely not acceptable. I think it is a recurrent error, how widespread, what you want to assign a higher ethical value to the individual and collective behavior of matrix and the confessional, without entering the sterile controversy spiral of poor moral and ethical sense expressed by some individual and collective behavior of a religious nature in 'context of world events that have scarred the century past, I claim, however, the absolute moral sense of the many important types of associations nondenominational, apolitical and non-partisan that are increasingly spreading around the world. Atheism does not mean ethical debauchery, I admit it can be live on the edge with a sense of "incomplete", but in religion must be tripped over, it's a bit 'as the courage of one Manzoni ... if can not give, but in His absence is incorrect to consider that individual behavior is based on ethics less than a believer. That's why I end up sharing more religiously setting tank to the problem by Professor Amartya K. Sen.
We can only give a quick glance at the reading of the problem given by Professor Ludwig Raiser (The task of private law, translated and published by Giuffrè in 1990, but written in 1977). The German liberal jurist, whose thought is deeply through the Protestant ethic that has always inspired, he argued that the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, signed in 1948, did not touch the problem of developing countries, economically too low to ensure those minimum rights for its citizens. Since there is no legal obligation to help the weaker states, Professor Raiser, interpreting, therefore, the Declaration in a broad sense, argued that the industrialized countries and companies located there were required, when establishing economic relations with developing countries, to require that the counterparties to respect the rights of the human person and human dignity. By the time he hoped it would entrench the belief "that is over the age of unlimited economic growth achieved at the expense of the industrialized countries of the developing world and the international economy will soon face a catastrophe if the imbalance existing will not be eliminated by a joint effort. Today, what is claimed by industrialized countries therefore reflects, in reality, their own economic interests and political long term: there we went far beyond mere compliance with ethical principles. " One of his last statements, testifying that in fact the seeds of the crisis of the theory of market economy were already at work long before the fall of opposition, as claimed by Bazoli, is that "it is up to the defenders of ' market economy prove that it is able to overcome the current crisis. " So if companies decide to maintain a system of capitalist, ran the year 1977, the ideal model of Franz Böhm should be shelved forever, "but because his goal was not, in fact, a development economic end in itself, but the realization of freedom and justice in society, he willingly accepts that a new generation will pursue this very purpose, and pursue under the sign of changed conditions, and with methods different from his. "
I previously noted, with Professor Bazoli, in the absence of a supranational body capable of injecting the ethics law, the guilty silence of individual States and, indeed, to coincide with a growing shift away from certain areas of the same non-productive, there is, however, engraftment of ethics in the conduct of individuals, social workers, loose aggregations and associations (In Italy there are about 220 000 companies operating in the not for profit). Would then be tempted to argue that, therefore, moral philosophy and ethics are not matters to be required to teach or enforce the legal penalty, but that in order to demonstrate efficacy with adamant and sincere, must spring from a spontaneous impulse and felt a mature and civil society. And 'This, then, the path just before the proper law is inspired by ethics meanwhile penetrated the connective tissue of society and democracy. If not, probably, there would be an ethics artificial, built by the conjunction of a legal fence that would ultimately denigrated. The increasing number of organizations working for inspiration to secure greater equality and ethics in their economic decisions, bodes well on how this principle was actually metabolized, but if you do not, and if others were, however, the pulse generators of these realities, if that is still once they were put in place tools to achieve selfish interests and instincts and, well, then I do not know how much time we would be able to heal, limiting the damage already under the eyes of all the imbalances dramatically emerged on both sides of these, our two centuries.
Marco Cramarossa
Chartered Accountants in Bari
marco.cramarossa @ cndc.it
0 comments:
Post a Comment