Question

-Revise the main concepts that reflect Smith/ Marx’s theories of economics/ market and the role of the state?

-The role of the state in an ideal economy for Marx and Smith. Smith’s theory of development and free market and the actual globalized market?

-The “materialist perspective” of social order and the two materialism?

-Revise Smith’s theory of self-interest and how you’d criticize it using cultural practices?

-Revise the importance of social science (including Anthropology) to reflect critically on the effects of science on our society and how humanism could be the answer to sciences’ setbacks?

Answer 1

-Smith gave the concept of "Invisible Hand" and on policy of laissez faire (let-it-be) for markets, influenced role of state to let a free market.

Marx gave the concept of Economy to be based on equality and socialism, influenced the revolution to overthrow bourgeoisie or capitalist as Capitalism was based on exploitation of labours, and idelaized to establish a communist state.

Smith laid the foundations of classical free market economic theory. The Wealth of Nations was a precursor to the modern academic discipline of economics. In this and other works, he developed the concept of division of labour and expounded upon how rational self-interest and competition can lead to economic prosperity. Smith was controversial in his own day and his general approach and writing style were often satirised by Tory writers in the moralising tradition of William Hogarth and Jonathan Swift.

-Smith outlined three important government functions: national defense, administration of justice (law and order), and the provision of certain public goods (e.g., transportation infrastructure)

Marx became stateless and lived in exile in London, due to his political publications, where he continued to develop his thought in collaboration with German thinker Friedrich Engels and publish his writings, researching in the British Museum. His best-known titles are the 1848 pamphlet, The Communist Manifesto, and the three-volume Das Kapital. His political and philosophical thought had enormous influence on subsequent intellectual, economic and political history and his name has been used as an adjective, a noun and a school of social theory.

Marx has been described as one of the most influential figures in human history, and his work has been both lauded and criticised. His work in economics laid the basis for much of the current understanding of labour and its relation to capital, and subsequent economic thought. Many intellectuals, labour unions, artists and political parties worldwide have been influenced by Marx's work, with many modifying or adapting his ideas. Marx is typically cited as one of the principal architects of modern social science.

Marx didn't think that the state should have any role in the economy. The essence of his philosophy is that in the ultimate classless society, the state will have "withered away".

Marx and Engels both argued that the state was just the executive committee of the upper classes, and that once the evils of capitalism were eliminated, the state would go along with them.

Marx's earlier writings were even more clear in their avowed hatred of the state. For example, in the Communist Manifesto, he argued that the state was a "parasitic" institution that was built upon the superstructure of the economy and that actively worked against the public interest. In particular, the Marxists charge that the state is the primary instrument of repression of the lower classes, serving primarily to prop up the power of the ruling (elite) classes

-Adam Smith is known as father of economics. We get his ideas about economic development from his well-known book, “An Enquiry into the Nature and Causes of Wealth of Nations” (1976) which has tremendously influenced the thinking about economic growth and development.

"State interference in social relations becomes, in one domain after another, superfluous, and then dies out of itself; the government of persons is replaced by the administration of things, and by the conduct of processes of production. The State is not "abolished". It dies out...Socialized production upon a predetermined plan becomes henceforth possible. The development of production makes the existence of different classes of society thenceforth an anachronism. In proportion as anarchy in social production vanishes, the political authority of the State dies out. Man, at last the master of his own form of social organization, becomes at the same time the lord over Nature, his own master — free."
– Engels (Socialism: Utopia and Scientific, 1880) with regards to Marx's and Engels' take on state.

Smith- He laid stress on individual freedom in conducting their economic affairs without any obstructions and restrictions by the Government. He advocated free trade among nations of the world and urged that all restrictions on foreign trade should be removed to promote international specialization so as to increase the incomes of the nations.

The crucial aspects of development theory as propounded by Adam Smith are – (1) division of labour and (2) capital accumulation. Productivity of labors increases through division of labour. The two factors that facilitate the use of more division of labour are capital accumulation and size of market.

Adam Smith and Invisible Hand- As every individual, therefore, endeavours as much as he can both to employ his capital in the support of domestic industry, and so to direct that industry that its produce may be of the greatest value; every individual necessarily labours to render the annual revenue of the society as great as he can. He generally, indeed, neither intends to promote the public interest, nor knows how much he is promoting it. By preferring the support of domestic to that of foreign industry, he intends only his own security; and by directing that industry in such a manner as its produce may be of the greatest value, he intends only his own gain, and he is in this, as in many other cases, led by an invisible hand to promote an end which was no part of his intention. Nor is it always the worse for the society that it was no part of it. By pursuing his own interest he frequently promotes that of the society more effectually than when he really intends to promote it. I have never known much good done by those who affected to trade for the public good. It is an affectation, indeed, not very common among merchants, and very few words need be employed in dissuading them from it.

-KARL MARX was a materialist--more than that, he was a historical materialist. Marxists, in order to establish their credentials in political arguments, frequently claim that they are giving a materialist analysis of a phenomenon. The claim that a materialist analysis is being provided both attests to the Marxist credentials of the argument, and validates the attitudes and actions that follow from that analysis.

A contrast has often been drawn in the past between materialism and views condemned as "idealist"--or, more recently, with views which are suffused with non- or anti-Marxist presuppositions and theories, including various brands of reformism, identity politics and other supposed deviations.

Dialectical materialism, a philosophical approach to reality derived from the writings of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels. For Marx and Engels, materialism meant that the material world, perceptible to the senses, has objective reality independent of mind or spirit. They did not deny the reality of mental or spiritual processes but affirmed that ideas could arise, therefore, only as products and reflections of material conditions. Marx and Engels understood materialism as the opposite of idealism, by which they meant any theory that treats matter as dependent on mind or spirit, or mind or spirit as capable of existing independently of matter. For them, the materialist and idealist views were irreconcilably opposed throughout the historical development of philosophy. They adopted a thoroughgoing materialist approach.

Adam Smith and Traditional: Wealth of Nation promotes self-interest. Adam Smith, the father of modern economics, explains that the best economic benefit for all can usually be accomplished when individuals act in their self-interest.

A market economy is an economic system in which individuals own most of the resources - land, labor, and capital - and control their use through voluntary decisions made in the marketplace. It is a system in which the government plays a small role. In this type of economy, two forces - self-interest and competition - play a very important role.

Self Interest is the motivator of economic activity.

In fact, most of the economic activity we see around us is the result of self-interested behavior. Adam Smith described it this way in his book, The Wealth of Nations:

"It is not from the benevolence (kindness) of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest."

Competition is the regulator of economic activity.

Problems with Self-Interest -

issue of excessive self-interest;

People so concerned with self-interest that they prefer themselves to others.

Greed of merchants

Though it be true, therefore, that every individual, in is own breast, naturally prefers himself to all mankind, yet he dares not look mankind in the face, and avow that he acts according to this principle.

Excessive self-interest damages society and the individual

Adam Smith described self-interest and competition in a market economy as the "invisible hand" that guides the economy.

Science has profound effect on our society

We employ scientific method to solve our day to day problems and questions;

Science which emerged in renaissance overthrew many myths and mythologies and overthrew many superstitions and superstitious beliefs.

Science was propounded forward by enlightened minds.

Objectivity is the main thrust of Science.

Science is in concept opposed to Arts which is practical experience of persons.

But practical experience that Sun rises from east and sets in west will lead to erroneous assumption that Sun moves around EARTH, WHEN FROM SCIENCE we know the truth that Earth revolves around Sun.

So science helps in discovering the facts. By science we come to seperate facts from myths.

Science has advanced the knowledge of human to torrential levels, with science there has come advancements in technologies.

Science has made spiritualism and humanism lost somewhat.

But it is in hand of humans how to use Science.

It is the intention of the Human how to employ Science- whether for welfare of Humans or destructive purposes such as nuclear bombs.

Social science is scientific studies related to societies and/or its parts.

Social science can either stick to being Scientific method abiding or may free itself from Scientific method in pursuing wholistic ideas, an approach by other methods to be more benevolent to humans.

Nehru had a tremendous faith in the human. In order to show the supremacy of man over God he argued, "God we may deny, but what hope is there for us if we deny man and thus reduce everything to futility."

Instead of having faith in God and religion Nehru advocated humanism - which he termed as 'scientific humanism'. It represents 'synthesis between humanism and scientific spirit'. Scientific humanism advocated by Nehru is practical and pragmatic, ethical and social, altruistic and humanitarian. It is governed by practical idealism for social betterment.

Humanists might respond to the fact that science can't answer everything and that that leaves space for religion.

We have already learned how many of the questions that were once considered within the remit of religion are now considered scientific questions (eg. questions that asked for explanations of the weather or disease). There are still many other religious, spiritual, or supernatural claims about the nature of reality that are held by some to be beyond the remit of science. However, for many of these claims, it is simply not the case that science cannot address them. For example, claims about whether prayer makes a difference can be empirically tested, as can the claims made by mediums, astrologers, and faith healers. Humanists believe we should therefore be wary about claims that such questions are off-limits to science.  Science can provide us with facts about the effects our actions can have on the world (eg the impact of our behaviour on other human beings, on non-human animals, and on the environment). This still does not mean science can tell us what we should do. Finally, when it comes to so-called ‘ultimate’ questions about meanings and purposes, such questions are only important or meaningful if you believe such meanings and purposes really exist. For a humanist, some of these questions can simply be dissolved. For example, questions around why bad things happen and human beings suffer, which may be of fundamental importance to believers in a benevolent deity, can for an atheist simply be answered through scientific descriptions of the way the world is. Other ‘ultimate’ questions can simply be reinterpreted or redefined in more human terms. Humanism is not therefore scientism. Let the humanism invoke spiritualism in broad definition to answer what science does not have answers for. Humanism can answer to sciences' setback by invoking our intent and that we should do good, building up on our golden age traditions.

With this you have reached the limit of questions of which the first/priority question or parts is to be answered.