IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/cambje/v40y2016i3p701-726..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Apostles’ justice: Cambridge reflections on economic inequality from Moore’s Principia Ethica to Keynes’s General Theory (1903–36)

Author

Listed:
  • Daniela Donnini Macciò

Abstract

This article explores economic justice in the writings of the Cambridge authors G. L. Dickinson, G. Shove, R. Hawtrey, D. H. Robertson, H.O. Meredith, J. H. Bell and F. Ramsey, who were either members of the Apostles’ discussion society or, like Hugh Dalton, ‘lay’ followers of its philosophical leader, G. E. Moore. The article challenges the prevalent view depicting the Apostles as uninterested in social problems. Their analyses of economic inequality are reviewed in connection with the Marshallian tradition, the impact of Fabianism and J. M. Keynes’s views of social justice. Special attention is paid to some neglected aspects of Moore’s Principia Ethica, which were debated in the Society and influenced the Apostles’ social awareness. They believed that large inequalities were both unjust and inefficient, and, as Moore’s disciples, they rejected the hedonistic perspective and considered justice not as an end in itself but as a means to the Good.

Suggested Citation

  • Daniela Donnini Macciò, 2016. "The Apostles’ justice: Cambridge reflections on economic inequality from Moore’s Principia Ethica to Keynes’s General Theory (1903–36)," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 40(3), pages 701-726.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:cambje:v:40:y:2016:i:3:p:701-726.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/cje/bev058
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:cambje:v:40:y:2016:i:3:p:701-726.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/cje .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.