I would first like to point out that while we know the place of birth of Adam Smith, which is Kirkaldy, a small town on the east coast of Scotland, we don't know the precise day of his birth; we only know that it occurred a few weeks after the death of his father, a customs clerk, which occurred between January 1723 and June 5 of that same year when Adam Smith was baptized.
In celebrating the anniversary of the birth of a great author of such a distant past, it is natural to ask ourselves some questions. The first question is what is generally the best way to approach his work and thought, how to show his relevance and significance, to justify revisiting it. There are in fact different ways of arguing it. The most frequent is that of demonstrating the importance for today, but there is also naturally the importance that derives from the elements it offers us to better know and understand, from the inside, the historical period in which that thought is located , but there is also that of supporting its universal character as a contribution to knowledge
The second question is how to deal with the thought that is revealed in texts from centuries ago, in which language and categories are necessarily different from those we use today. Here what matters is the ability to reconstruct the context and the conceptual apparatus used by the author. The discussion panel and respect of the testi, avoiding the temptation to translate concepts into a form more suited to our thinking system, is an exercise in philological rigor that must be pursued with conviction.
The third question is that the great authors have been studied and interpreted for a very long time and it is inevitable that in revisit his thoughts we must take into account what literature has rightly or wrongly given us. How to choose interpretations that seem convincing to us and discard those that are not. In any case, what has already been written cannot and should not be ignored.
In this short speech I will try to give some answers to these questions, without claiming exhaustiveness or, even worse, truth, but as a way of opening up to discussion.
The importance of Adam Smith not only for political economy
I contributions of Smith concern many fields: rhetoric, moral philosophy, jurisprudence, political economy. Usually the focus is on this last field, the one to which Smith owes his fame. However, it is important to underline that his reflections on this topic are part of a broader study on human behavior and society.
So the relevance of Smith's thoughts lies in the discussion offered on the different motivations ofhuman action, in which he made an important contribution in highlighting the connection between the pursuit of individual interest and moral rules, those which in Smith's vision - which still remains valid today - are necessary for the proper functioning of common life in society.
This vision emerges from Smith's two major works, The Theory of Moral Sentiments e The Wealth of Nationsi, which must be read as complementary and not alternative texts.
in Theory of moral sentiments we find the statement that “the main part of human happiness comes from the awareness of being loved”; sympathy, that is, the ability to share the feelings of others, leads us to judge our actions based on their effects on others as well as on ourselves. According to Smith, individuals evaluate their actions by taking the point of view of an impartial spectator who, equipped with knowledge of all the elements he knows, judges these actions like an average citizen. Legal institutions, whose functioning is essential to guarantee the safety of market exchanges, find in this principle behavior moral their necessary concrete support.
If we compare what has been said with the famous song of Wealth of nations, “It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their interest,” which has been interpreted as the only explanation of the behavior human underlying the market economy, we understand it in the right context.
The prerequisite – vital for the functioning of a market economy – is that of a society founded on the general acceptance of the moral principle of sympathy and equipped with the administrative and legal institutions necessary to deal with cases in which common morality is violated.
Smith's liberalism was pragmatic and progressive
If we read the two works in context, we see that Adam Smith highlighted the complexity of human action, not its simplification in the idea that the pursuit of individual interest is the main reason for action, which instead must be tempered by the idea of social coexistence. Even the belief inefficiency of the free market it is a simplification, given the role assigned to the figure of the "impartial spectator".
This Smithian subtlety, the rejection of clear theses without qualifications and specifications, makes the interpretation of his works difficult and interesting at the same time.
I would like to recall two examples of interpretative issues of the text of the Wealth of nations, which are of particular interest.
The first of these examples concerns the Smith's liberalism. It should be underlined that Smith's attitude was progressive towards the major political issues of his time, such as the conflict for the independence of the American colonies.
Smith was not a liberal dogmatic, but pragmatic: strongly critical not only of feudal institutions and the policies characteristic of the absolutist state, but also of capitalist concentrations of economic power, and distrustful of the propensity of "merchants" to establish monopoly.
Another question arises from the comparison between the first and fifth book de The Wealth of Nations, regarding the apparently contradictory position taken by Smith towards the work division. In the first book, the division of labor is exalted as the foundation for increasing productivity, therefore for the well-being of the population and for civil progress itself; in the fifth book, in a passage often cited as a precursor to the Marxian theory of alienation, Smith underlines the negative characteristics of fragmented work, which can make man a brute, but remains confident in believing that the division of labor, through increased productivity and the extension of the market, is the engine of progress and in latest analysis of expanded well-being.
In Smith there is substantial faith in man and in the progress of human societies
The thesis of a contradiction between the Theory of moral sentiments to della Wealth of nations, one based on the principle of sympathy and the other of interest, prevailed for a certain period in literature, constituting what has been labeled Das Adam Smith Problem.
According to this thesis, the defense of the free pursuit ofpersonal interest inside amarket economy proposed by Smith in Lto Wealth of Nations would correspond to the mature position of the Scottish economist. It is believed that Smith joined her after rejecting the position initially defended The Theory of Moral Sentiments, according to which supportive behavior between members of a community is necessary for the very survival of the collective entity.
This thesis appears untenable when we remember that The Theory of Moral Sentiments fu repeatedly reprinted, always under the control of the author, who took advantage of the opportunity offered by the reprints to introduce changes to the work, even after the publication of the The Wealth of Nations. Smith would have had a schizophrenic personality if he had presented his readers with two contradictory works at the same time!
According to Smith, “sympathy, that is, the ability to share the feelings of others, leads us to judge our actions on the basis of their effects on others as well as on ourselves….
This type of moral attitude is a prerequisite for the very survival of human societies: Society [...] cannot exist among those who are always ready to harm themselves and hurt each other."
The pursuit of individual interest must therefore not be pursued at any cost freedom it should not be understood as evidence of rules and limits, both in economic and social action. There is therefore no contradiction between the two principles.
In conclusion, a substantial faith in man, although recognized as an essentially imperfect being, and in the possibility of progress of human societies, is the message positive which makes the work of the Scottish thinker a central point of reference for the reflection on man company then as now.
