Irreligion and the Impartial Spectator in Smith’s Moral System

In Recasting Hume and Early Modern Philosophy. New York, NY, USA: pp. 384-402 (2005)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

[First published in Italian as: “L’irreligione e lo spettatore imparziale nel sistema morale di Adam Smith”, in Rivista di Filosofia 3 (3):375-403 (2005). Translated by E. Lecaldano.] A number of commentators on Smith’s philosophy have observed that the relationship between his moral theory and his theological beliefs is “exceedingly difficult to unravel.” The available evidence, as generally presented, suggests that although Smith was not entirely orthodox by contemporary standards, he has no obvious or significant irreligious commitments or orientation. Contrary to this view of things, this essay argues that behind the veneer of orthodoxy that covers Smith’s discussion in The Theory of the Moral Sentiments there are significant irreligious themes present in his work.

Links

PhilArchive

External links

  • This entry has no external links. Add one.
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Was Smith A Moral Subjectivist?Kevin Quinn - 2019 - Economic Thought 8 (1):30.
Adam Smith: The sympathetic process and the origin and function of conscience.Christel Fricke - 2013 - In Christopher J. Berry, Maria Pia Paganelli & Craig Smith (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Adam Smith. Oxford University Press. pp. 177.
Marcus Aurelius, the Stoic Ethic, and Adam Smith.Harold B. Jones - 2010 - Journal of Business Ethics 95 (1):89 - 96.
Hume's and Smith's Partial Sympathies and Impartial Stances.Jon Rick - 2007 - Journal of Scottish Philosophy 5 (2):135-158.

Analytics

Added to PP
2022-03-25

Downloads
307 (#63,414)

6 months
125 (#27,531)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Paul Russell
Lund University

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Correction.[author unknown] - 1990 - British Journal for the History of Science 23 (1):99-99.

Add more references