IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cpo/journl/y2013i65p69-96.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Social justice: Hayek and Sen facing Rawls. An unexpected methodological closeness

Author

Listed:
  • Claude Gamel

Abstract

Through their methods for studying social justice, Rawls, Hayek and Sen are each situated on the summit of a triangle, where “comparatism” of the latter stands at equal distance from “contractualism” of the first former and from “evolutionism” of the second one (1). Nevertheless, when the position of the philosopher is used as a landmark, both economists seem to develop analyses which are strangely near enough to each other: in spite of quite different conclusions (2), a first convergence appears about their positions which are really opposed to Rawlsian contractualism (3). More basically, Hayek’s and Sen’s thought processes appear to be comparable, because they are both pragmatic (4). The fact that their opposed results might stem from so near methods designs a paradox, which has still to be confirmed by further studies (5).

Suggested Citation

  • Claude Gamel, 2013. "Social justice: Hayek and Sen facing Rawls. An unexpected methodological closeness," Cahiers d’économie politique / Papers in Political Economy, L'Harmattan, issue 65, pages 69-96.
    • Handle: RePEc:cpo:journl:y:2013:i:65:p:69-96
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.cairn.info/revue-cahiers-d-economie-politique.htm
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    More about this item

    Keywords

    social justice; methods; contractualism; evolutionism; comparatism.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • A12 - General Economics and Teaching - - General Economics - - - Relation of Economics to Other Disciplines
    • B41 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - Economic Methodology - - - Economic Methodology
    • D63 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Equity, Justice, Inequality, and Other Normative Criteria and Measurement

    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:cpo:journl:y:2013:i:65:p:69-96. 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: Carlos Andrés Vasco Correa (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.cahiersdecopo.fr/fr/ .

    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.