Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-29T11:51:02.687Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

REPLY TO PUTNAM AND WALSH

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 November 2007

PARTHA DASGUPTA*
Affiliation:
University of Cambridge

Extract

Social thinkers frequently remind us that people differ on what constitutes personal well-being, but that even when they don't differ, they disagree over the extent to which one person's well-being can be permitted to be traded off against another's. They tell us that political differences are to be traced to differences in people's conceptions of personal and social well-being. We are given to understand, in other words, that people's ethics differ.

Type
Essay
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2007

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

Atkinson, A. B. and Stiglitz, J. E.. 1980. Lectures in Public Economics. New York, McGraw Hill.Google Scholar
Barbarin, O. and Richter, L.. 2001. Mandela's Children: Growing Up in Post-Apartheid South Africa. London, Routledge.Google Scholar
Bergson, A.Burk, A. 1938. A reformulation of certain aspects of welfare economics. Quarterly Journal of Economics 52 (3):310–34.Google Scholar
Case, A. and Deaton, A.. 1999. School inputs and educational outcomes in South Africa. Quarterly Journal of Economics 114 (3):1047–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dasgupta, P. 2005. What do economists analyze and why: values or facts? Economics and Philosophy 21 (2):221–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ehrlich, P. R. and Ehrlich, A. H.. 1996. Betrayal of Science and Reason: How Anti-Environmentalism Threatens Our Future. Washington, DC, Island Press.Google Scholar
Graaff de, V. J. 1962. Theoretical Welfare Economics. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Harsanyi, J. C. 1955. Cardinal welfare, individualistic ethics and interpersonal comparisons of utility. Journal of Political Economy 63 (3):309–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koopmans, T. C. 1972. Representation of preference orderings over time. In McGuire, C. B. and Radner, R., eds., Decision and Organization. Amsterdam, North Holland.Google Scholar
Mas-Colell, A., Whinston, M., and Green, J.. 1995. Microeconomic Theory. New York, Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Maskin, E. 1978. A Theorem on Utilitarianism. Review of Economic Studies 45 (1):94–6.Google Scholar
Musgrave, R. 1959. Theory of Public Finance. New York, McGraw Hill.Google Scholar
Myles, G. D. 1995. Public Economics. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nussbaum, M. 2003. Tragedy and human capabilities: a response to Vivian Walsh. Review of Political Economy 15 (3):413–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Putnam, H. 1993. Objectivity and the science-ethics distinction. In Nussbaum, M. and Sen, A., eds., The Quality of Life. Oxford, Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Putnam, H. 2002. The Collapse of the Fact/Value Distinction. Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Putnam, H. 2003. For ethics and economics without the dichotomies. Review of Political Economy 15 (3):395412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Putnam, H. and Walsh, V.. 2007. A Response to Dasgupta. Economics and Philosophy 23:359–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rawls, J. 1972. A Theory of Justice. Oxford, Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Samuelson, P. A. 1947. Foundations of Economic Analysis. Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Sen, A. 1985. Commodities and Capabilities. Amsterdam, North Holland.Google Scholar
Sen, A. 1987. On Ethics andx Economics. Oxford, Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar