ABSTRACT OF PAPER
Title: A turning point in the concept of justice: from Adam Smith to John Stuart Mill
Author: TRINCADO AZNAR Estrella
Classical economists, John Stuart Mill included, based their theories in Adam Smith’s system. At some point, they labelled it as a “utilitarian” theory. However, Smith was non-utilitarian. He even was anti-utilitarian. One of the most amazing differences between classical economists’ versus Smithian theory consists of their concept of justice. Classical economists are based on a utilitarian concept; Smith criticizes the concept of utilitarian justice. Being utility a subjective picture, classical economists find more difficult to draw limits to state intervention than Smith does. This paper compares Smith’s and John Stuart Mill’s concept of justice when they make the case for land tenure. Mill admits that society cannot properly be said to owe anything to the poor. However, not arguing from 'abstract rights,' but from 'utility' understood in its largest sense, Mill defended future nationalization of land. Mill was unable to draw any limits to state intervention. Smith, on the contrary, defended that justice is not a utilitarian concept. In this case, limits to state intervention are more easily drawn.
Registred web users only can download this paper - Go back
Please note that files available for download have not been checked for viruses. These files have been submitted by authors of the conference to this web site. Conference organisers can't accept any responsibility for damages caused to users by downloading such files.