[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
.The relation of political economy to the physical sciences is thensimply this, that it presupposes them; it is sometimes concerned withphysical laws as premisses, but never as conclusions.Accordingly when the production of wealth is said to be one of thegreat departments of economic science, reference is made primarily to The Scope and Method of Political Economy/45what may be called the social laws of the production of wealth (i.e., tothe various influences exerted on production by division of labour, for-eign trade, methods of distribution, and so forth), rather than to thephysical processes by whose aid production is carried on.The physicalrequisites of the production of wealth need to be summarized in theirbroadest outlines; but the science is not directly concerned with the tech-nique of different trades and occupations.Again, whilst economists rec-ognize the physical conditions affecting men s economic efficiency, theimmediate effects of these conditions are accepted as facts from physi-ology and other sciences; it is only in so far as they indirectly affect orare affected by the social facts of wealth that economic science itselfinvestigates them.The differentia of economic laws, as contrasted with purely physi-cal laws, consists in the fact that the former imply voluntary humanaction.43 The forces of competition are, indeed, sometimes spoken of asif they were themselves mechanical and automatic in their operation.But, as we have already had occasion to remark, this is not the case.When, for instance, we speak of the price of a commodity as determinedby supply and demand, we mean by supply not the total amount inexistence, but the amount offered for sale by holders of the commodity;and it is clear that in this sense supply, equally with demand, is depen-dent upon human judgment and will.§2.Political economy and psychology. In order to mark off po-litical economy from the physical sciences, it is spoken of sometimes asa moral science, sometimes as a social science.Of these descriptions,the latter is to be preferred.The term moral science is, to begin with, notfree from ambiguity.This term is no doubt sometimes used in a broadsense as including all the separate sciences that treat of man in his sub-jective capacity, that is, as a being who feels, thinks, and wills.Butmore frequently it is used as a synonym for ethics; and hence to speak ofeconomic science as a moral science is likely to obscure its positivecharacter.44But the above is not the only reason why it is better not to describepolitical economy simply as a moral science.The sciences that relate toman fall into two subdivisions those that are concerned with man inhis purely individual capacity, and those that are concerned with himprincipally as a member of society.Political economy belongs to thelatter of these subdivisions.It is true that some of the problems dis-cussed by the science those relating, for example, to the functions of 46/John Neville Keynescapital would arise in a more or less rudimentary form in relation toan isolated individual; and it is accordingly possible to illustrate certainelementary economic principles by reference to the conduct of a RobinsonCrusoe.As soon, however, as we advance beyond the threshold of thescience, it becomes necessary to regard human beings, not in isolation,but as of associated communities including others besides themselves.The most prominent characteristic of actual economic life is the relationof mutual dependence that subsists between different individuals; andpolitical economy may be said to be essentially concerned with eco-nomic life as a special aspect of social life.Political economy should then be described as a social, rather thanas a moral or psychological, science.It presupposes psychology just asit presupposes the physical sciences, and the natural starting point forthe economist in his more abstract enquiries is a consideration of themotives by which individuals are usually influenced in their economicrelations; but the science is not therefore a branch of psychology.Thebare facts that other things being equal men prefer a greater to a smallergain.What under certain conditions they will forego present for the sakeof future gratifications, and the like, are psychological facts of greateconomic importance.But they are assumed by the economist, not es-tablished by him.He does not seek to explain or analyse them: nor doeshe investigate all the consequences to which they lead.Economic lawsin the strict sense are different from the above.They are not simple lawsof human nature, but laws of complex social facts resulting from simplelaws of human nature.An illustration may be quoted from Cairnes. Rent, he observes, is a complex phenomenon, arising from the playof human interests when brought into contact with the actual physicalconditions of the soil in relation to the physiological character of veg-etable productions [ Pobierz caÅ‚ość w formacie PDF ]