WEBVTT

NOTE 2. Knowledge and Value

1
00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:04.080
CHAPTER 2 KNOWLEDGE AND VALUE

2
00:00:04.080 --> 00:00:10.880
1. THE BIAS DOCTRINE

3
00:00:10.880 --> 00:00:16.160
The accusation of bias has been leveled against economists long before Marx integrated it

4
00:00:16.160 --> 00:00:22.500
into his doctrines. Today it is fairly generally endorsed by writers and politicians who, although

5
00:00:22.500 --> 00:00:29.580
they are in many respects influenced by Marxian ideas, cannot simply be considered Marxians.

6
00:00:29.580 --> 00:00:34.320
We must attach to their approach a meaning that differs from that which it has in the

7
00:00:34.320 --> 00:00:37.440
context of dialectical materialism.

8
00:00:37.440 --> 00:00:43.220
We must therefore distinguish two varieties of the bias doctrine, the Marxian and the

9
00:00:43.220 --> 00:00:45.060
non-Marxian.

10
00:00:45.060 --> 00:00:50.420
The former will be dealt with in later parts of this essay in a critical analysis of Marxian

11
00:00:50.420 --> 00:00:51.420
materialism.

12
00:00:51.420 --> 00:00:55.760
The latter alone is treated in this chapter.

13
00:00:55.760 --> 00:01:08.760
The scholars of both varieties of the bias doctrine recognized that their position would be extremely weak if they were merely to blame economics for an alleged bias without charging all other branches of science with the same fault.

14
00:01:08.760 --> 00:01:15.760
Hence, they generalized the bias doctrine, but this generalized doctrine we need not examine here.

15
00:01:15.760 --> 00:01:21.960
We may concentrate upon its core, the assertion that economics is necessarily not vertrei,

16
00:01:21.960 --> 00:01:27.120
but is tainted by prepossessions and prejudices rooted in value judgments.

17
00:01:27.120 --> 00:01:32.040
For all arguments advanced to support the doctrine of general bias are also resorted

18
00:01:32.040 --> 00:01:37.640
to in the endeavors to prove the special bias doctrine that refers to economics, while some

19
00:01:37.640 --> 00:01:42.240
of the arguments brought forward in favor of the special bias doctrine are manifestly

20
00:01:42.240 --> 00:01:45.480
inapplicable to the general doctrine.

21
00:01:45.480 --> 00:01:51.200
Some contemporary defenders of the bias doctrine have tried to link it with Freudian ideas.

22
00:01:51.200 --> 00:01:56.720
They contend that the bias they see in the economists is not conscious bias.

23
00:01:56.720 --> 00:02:01.220
The writers in question are not aware of their prejudgments and do not intentionally seek

24
00:02:01.220 --> 00:02:05.300
results that will justify their foregone conclusions.

25
00:02:05.300 --> 00:02:10.940
From the deep recesses of the subconscious, suppressed wishes unknown to the thinkers

26
00:03:10.940 --> 00:03:34.120
The most sophisticated psychoanalytical examination of Pascal's life tells us nothing about the

27
00:03:34.120 --> 00:03:40.180
scientific soundness or unsoundness of his mathematical and philosophical doctrines.

28
00:03:40.180 --> 00:03:46.180
If the failures and errors of a doctrine are unmasked by discursive reasoning, historians

29
00:03:46.180 --> 00:03:51.860
and biographers may try to explain them by tracing them back to their author's bias.

30
00:03:51.860 --> 00:03:56.900
But if no tenable objections can be raised against a theory, it is immaterial what kind

31
00:03:56.900 --> 00:04:00.060
of motives inspired its author.

32
00:04:00.060 --> 00:04:05.920
Granted that he was biased, but then we must realize that his alleged bias produced theorems

33
00:04:05.920 --> 00:04:10.160
which successfully withstood all objections.

34
00:04:10.160 --> 00:04:14.960
Commitment to a thinker's bias is no substitute for a refutation of his doctrines by tenable

35
00:04:14.960 --> 00:04:16.800
arguments.

36
00:04:16.800 --> 00:04:21.880
Those who charge the economists with bias merely show that they are at a loss to refute

37
00:04:21.880 --> 00:04:27.720
their teachings by critical analysis.

38
00:04:27.720 --> 00:04:32.800
Common Wheel vs. Special Interests

39
00:04:32.800 --> 00:04:37.700
Economic policies are directed toward the attainment of definite ends.

40
00:04:37.700 --> 00:04:43.140
In dealing with them, economics does not question the value attached to these ends by acting

41
00:04:43.140 --> 00:04:44.140
men.

42
00:04:44.140 --> 00:04:46.660
It merely investigates two points.

43
00:04:46.660 --> 00:04:52.220
First, whether or not the policies concerned are fit to attain the ends which those recommending

44
00:04:52.220 --> 00:04:54.780
and applying them want to attain.

45
00:04:54.780 --> 00:05:00.500
Secondly, whether these policies do not perhaps produce effects which, from the point of view

46
00:05:00.500 --> 00:05:04.820
of those recommending and applying them, are undesirable.

47
00:05:04.820 --> 00:05:10.900
It is true that the terms in which many economists, especially those of the older generations,

48
00:05:10.900 --> 00:05:15.180
expressed the result of their inquiries could easily be misinterpreted.

49
00:05:15.180 --> 00:05:20.100
In dealing with a definite policy, they adopted a manner of speech which would have been adequate

50
00:05:20.100 --> 00:05:24.880
from the point of view of those who considered resorting to it in order to attain definite

51
00:05:24.880 --> 00:05:26.380
ends.

52
00:05:26.380 --> 00:05:31.340
Precisely because the economists were not biased and did not venture to question the

53
00:05:31.340 --> 00:05:36.920
Acting Men's Choice of Ends, they presented the result of their deliberation in a mode

54
00:05:36.920 --> 00:05:42.240
of expression which took the valuations of the actors for granted.

55
00:05:42.240 --> 00:05:47.920
People aim at definite ends when resorting to a tariff or decreeing minimum wage rates.

56
00:05:47.920 --> 00:05:53.140
When the economists thought such policies would attain the ends sought by their supporters,

57
00:05:53.140 --> 00:05:57.780
they called them good, just as a physician calls a certain therapy good because he takes

58
00:05:57.780 --> 00:06:02.300
Makes the End, Curing His Patient, for Granted

59
00:06:02.300 --> 00:06:07.460
One of the most famous of the theorems developed by the classical economists, Ricardo's Theory

60
00:06:07.460 --> 00:06:13.820
of Comparative Costs, is safe against all criticism if we may judge by the fact that

61
00:06:13.820 --> 00:06:19.700
hundreds of passionate adversaries over a period of 140 years have failed to advance

62
00:06:19.700 --> 00:06:22.740
any tenable argument against it.

63
00:06:22.740 --> 00:06:28.400
It is much more than merely a theory dealing with the effects of free trade and protection.

64
00:06:28.400 --> 00:06:32.860
It is a proposition about the fundamental principles of human cooperation under the

65
00:06:32.860 --> 00:06:37.860
division of labor and specialization and the integration of vocational groups, about the

66
00:06:37.860 --> 00:06:43.960
origin and further intensification of social bonds between men, and should as such be called

67
00:06:43.960 --> 00:06:46.780
the law of association.

68
00:06:46.780 --> 00:06:53.020
It is indispensable for understanding the origin of civilization and the course of history.

69
00:06:53.020 --> 00:06:58.340
Contrary to popular conceptions, it does not say that free trade is good and protection

70
00:06:58.340 --> 00:06:59.740
bad.

71
00:06:59.740 --> 00:07:04.980
It merely demonstrates that protection is not a means to increase the supply of goods

72
00:07:04.980 --> 00:07:05.980
produced.

73
00:07:05.980 --> 00:07:13.100
Thus, it says nothing about protection's suitability or unsuitability to attain other ends.

74
00:07:13.100 --> 00:07:19.020
for instance, to improve a nation's chance of defending its independence and war.

75
00:07:19.020 --> 00:07:26.420
Those charging the economists with bias refer to their alleged eagerness to serve the interests.

76
00:07:26.420 --> 00:07:31.660
In the context of their accusation, this refers to selfish pursuit of the well-being of special

77
00:07:31.660 --> 00:07:35.580
groups to the prejudice of the common wheel.

78
00:07:35.580 --> 00:07:40.060
Now it must be remembered that the idea of the common wheel in the sense of a harmony

79
00:07:40.060 --> 00:07:46.460
of the Interests of All Members of Society is a modern idea, and that it owes its origin

80
00:07:46.460 --> 00:07:50.860
precisely to the teachings of the classical economists.

81
00:07:50.860 --> 00:07:55.660
Older generations believe that there is an irreconcilable conflict of interests among

82
00:07:55.660 --> 00:07:58.720
men and among groups of men.

83
00:07:58.720 --> 00:08:02.740
The gain of one is invariably the damage of others.

84
00:08:02.740 --> 00:08:06.440
No man profits but by the loss of others.

85
00:08:06.440 --> 00:08:11.280
You may call this tenet the Montaigne dogma because in modern times it was first expounded

86
00:08:11.280 --> 00:08:13.380
by Montaigne.

87
00:08:13.380 --> 00:08:19.280
It was the essence of the teachings of mercantilism and the main target of the classical economists'

88
00:08:19.280 --> 00:08:24.600
critique of mercantilism, to which they opposed their doctrine of the harmony of the rightly

89
00:08:24.600 --> 00:08:30.460
understood or long-run interests of all members of a market society.

90
00:08:30.460 --> 00:08:36.000
The socialists and the interventionists reject the doctrine of the harmony of interests.

91
00:08:36.000 --> 00:08:41.200
The socialists declare that there is irreconcilable conflict among the interests of the various

92
00:08:41.200 --> 00:08:43.760
social classes of a nation.

93
00:08:43.760 --> 00:08:49.400
While the interests of the proletarians demand the substitution of socialism for capitalism,

94
00:08:49.400 --> 00:08:53.600
those of the exploiters demand the preservation of capitalism.

95
00:08:53.600 --> 00:08:58.680
The nationalists declare that the interests of the various nations are irreconcilably

96
00:08:58.680 --> 00:09:00.760
in conflict.

97
00:09:00.760 --> 00:09:06.000
It is obvious that the antagonism of such incompatible doctrines can be resolved only

98
00:09:06.000 --> 00:09:11.920
by logical reasoning, but the opponents of the Harmony Doctrine are not prepared to submit

99
00:09:11.920 --> 00:09:14.760
their views to such examination.

100
00:09:14.760 --> 00:09:19.440
As soon as somebody criticizes their arguments and tries to prove the Harmony Doctrine, they

101
00:09:19.440 --> 00:09:21.880
cry out bias.

102
00:09:21.880 --> 00:09:27.240
The mere fact that only they and not their adversaries, the supporters of the Harmony

103
00:09:27.240 --> 00:09:32.640
raise this reproach of bias shows clearly that they are unable to reject their

104
00:09:32.640 --> 00:09:38.020
opponent's statements by radiosenation they engage in the examination of the

105
00:09:38.020 --> 00:09:42.320
problems concerned with the prepossession that only biased apologists

106
00:09:42.320 --> 00:09:47.040
of sinister interests can possibly contest the correctness of their

107
00:09:47.040 --> 00:09:52.440
socialist or interventionist dogmas in their eyes the mere fact that a man

108
00:09:52.440 --> 00:09:57.240
Man disagrees with their ideas is the proof of his bias.

109
00:09:57.240 --> 00:10:05.000
When carried to its ultimate logical consequences, this attitude implies the doctrine of polylogism.

110
00:10:05.000 --> 00:10:10.680
Polylogism denies the uniformity of the logical structure of the human mind.

111
00:10:10.680 --> 00:10:16.500
Every social class, every nation, race, or period of history is equipped with a logic

112
00:10:16.500 --> 00:10:21.360
that differs from the logic of other classes, nations, races, or ages.

113
00:10:21.360 --> 00:10:27.800
Hence, bourgeois economics differs from proletarian economics, German physics from the physics

114
00:10:27.800 --> 00:10:33.340
of other nations, Aryan mathematics from Semitic mathematics.

115
00:10:33.340 --> 00:10:38.780
There is no need to examine here the essentials of the various brands of polylogism.

116
00:10:38.780 --> 00:10:43.900
For polylogism never went beyond the simple declaration that a diversity of the mind's

117
00:10:43.900 --> 00:10:47.060
logical structure exists.

118
00:10:47.060 --> 00:10:50.660
It never pointed out in what these differences consist.

119
00:10:50.660 --> 00:10:56.580
For instance, how the logic of the proletarians differs from that of the bourgeois.

120
00:10:56.580 --> 00:11:02.300
All the champions of polylogism did was to reject definite statements by referring to

121
00:11:02.300 --> 00:11:07.500
unspecified peculiarities of their authors' logic.

122
00:11:07.500 --> 00:11:09.820
3.

123
00:11:09.820 --> 00:11:13.240
ECONOMICS AND VALUE

124
00:11:13.240 --> 00:11:18.380
The main argument of the classical harmony doctrine starts from the distinction between

125
00:11:18.380 --> 00:11:23.580
Interests in the short run and those in the long run, the latter being referred to as

126
00:11:23.580 --> 00:11:26.900
the rightly understood interests.

127
00:11:26.900 --> 00:11:33.380
Let us examine the bearing of this distinction upon the problem of privileges.

128
00:11:33.380 --> 00:11:37.820
One group of men certainly gains by a privilege granted to them.

129
00:11:37.820 --> 00:11:43.180
A group of producers, protected by a tariff, a subsidy, or any other modern protectionist

130
00:11:43.180 --> 00:11:50.140
method against the competition of more efficient rivals, gains at the expense of the consumers.

131
00:11:50.140 --> 00:11:55.220
But will the rest of the nation, taxpayers and buyers of the protected article, tolerate

132
00:11:55.220 --> 00:12:01.220
the privilege of a minority? They will only acquiesce in it if they themselves are benefited

133
00:12:01.220 --> 00:12:07.220
by an analogous privilege. Then everybody loses as much in his capacity as consumer

134
00:12:07.220 --> 00:12:10.300
as he wins in his capacity as producer.

135
00:12:10.300 --> 00:12:16.660
Moreover, all are harmed by the substitution of less efficient for more efficient methods

136
00:12:16.660 --> 00:12:18.940
of production.

137
00:12:18.940 --> 00:12:23.700
If one deals with economic policies from the point of view of this distinction between

138
00:12:23.700 --> 00:12:29.960
long and short-run interests, there is no ground for charging the economist with bias.

139
00:12:29.960 --> 00:12:34.480
He does not condemn feather-bedding of the railroadman because it benefits the railroadman

140
00:12:34.480 --> 00:12:38.160
at the expense of other groups whom he likes better.

141
00:12:38.160 --> 00:12:43.560
He shows that the railroad men cannot prevent featherbedding from becoming a general practice

142
00:12:43.560 --> 00:12:50.240
and that then, that is, in the long run, it hurts them no less than other people.

143
00:12:50.240 --> 00:12:56.280
Of course, the objections the economists advanced to the plans of the socialists and the interventionists

144
00:12:56.280 --> 00:13:01.760
carry no weight with those who do not approve of the ends which the peoples of Western civilization

145
00:13:01.760 --> 00:13:03.960
take for granted.

146
00:13:03.960 --> 00:13:09.520
Those who prefer penury and slavery to material well-being and all that can only develop where

147
00:13:09.520 --> 00:13:15.080
there is material well-being may deem all these objections irrelevant.

148
00:13:15.080 --> 00:13:20.720
But the economists have repeatedly emphasized that they deal with socialism and interventionism

149
00:13:20.720 --> 00:13:25.820
from the point of view of the generally accepted values of Western civilization.

150
00:13:25.820 --> 00:13:31.760
The socialists and interventionists not only have not, at least not openly, denied these

151
00:13:31.760 --> 00:13:36.560
These values, but have emphatically declared that the realization of their own program

152
00:13:36.560 --> 00:13:40.560
will achieve them much better than will capitalism.

153
00:13:40.560 --> 00:13:46.240
It is true that most socialists and many interventionists attach value to equalizing the standard of

154
00:13:46.240 --> 00:13:48.720
living of all individuals.

155
00:13:48.720 --> 00:13:53.160
But the economists did not question the value judgment implied.

156
00:13:53.160 --> 00:13:58.100
All they did was to point out the inevitable consequences of equalization.

157
00:13:58.100 --> 00:14:02.300
They did not say, the end you are aiming at is bad.

158
00:14:02.300 --> 00:14:09.180
They said, realization of this end will bring effects which you yourselves deem more undesirable

159
00:14:09.180 --> 00:14:11.940
than inequality.

160
00:14:11.940 --> 00:14:14.260
4.

161
00:14:14.260 --> 00:14:17.580
BIAS AND INTOLERANCE

162
00:14:17.580 --> 00:14:22.260
It is obvious that there are many people who let their reasoning be influenced by judgments

163
00:14:22.260 --> 00:14:27.700
of value and that bias often corrupts the thinking of men.

164
00:14:27.700 --> 00:14:32.660
What is to be rejected is the popular doctrine that it is impossible to deal with economic

165
00:14:32.660 --> 00:14:38.620
problems without bias and that mere reference to bias without unmasking fallacies in the

166
00:14:38.620 --> 00:14:43.060
chain of reasoning is sufficient to explode a theory.

167
00:14:43.060 --> 00:14:48.820
The emergence of the bias doctrine implies in fact categorical acknowledgement of the

168
00:14:48.820 --> 00:14:54.340
impregnability of the teachings of economics against which the reproach of bias has been

169
00:14:54.340 --> 00:14:55.660
leveled.

170
00:14:55.660 --> 00:15:00.940
It was the first stage in the return to intolerance and persecution of dissenters, which is one

171
00:15:00.940 --> 00:15:03.980
of the main features of our age.

172
00:15:03.980 --> 00:15:08.620
As dissenters are guilty of bias, it is right to liquidate them.