Adam’s Fallacy: A Guide to Economic Theology Adam Smith’s book The Wealth of Nations is not noteworthy because it introduces any radical new ideas on capitalism, but rather because it gives a clear case of the possibility of a capitalist society developing, and more importantly undertakes the biggest problem capitalism has, at least in the eyes of Foley. “The question of how to be a good person and live a good and moral life within the antagonistic, impersonal, and self-regarding social relations that capitalism imposes” (Foley 2) is taken on by Smith. He argues that capitalism as it is typically seen – cold and selfish – is the opposite of its actual nature. Instead, he claims that being selfish within a capitalist society provides a service
…show more content…
While the two did propose several changes to the theory there were no revisions radical enough to relabel their adaptation, and so, rather than creating a new school of economics, they built onto the already present classical economic theory. The outcome of their adaption was what Foley dubbed a “gloomy science” (Foley 45). Relationships were distinguished to attempt to predict the growth of Earth’s population and its effects on the economy, specifically involving agriculture, the labor theory of value, and technological advances. These theories put a more dismal spin on Smith’s original ideas and eventually reached the conclusion “that the majority of humanity must of mathematical necessity live in great enough misery and poverty to stabilize the total population through a high mortality rate” (Foley 51). Building on this, Malthus concluded that charity for the poor was fruitless, as it only encouraged the reproduction of more poor. This gloomy train of logic is one that often comes from classical liberalism. Adam’s Fallacy becomes apparent when this logic is dissected. As Foley explains it, “The logic of commodity exchange is opposed to moral logic in both its principles and its conclusions. But more important, the reality of commodity exchange and its laws tend to defeat moral action. Thus Adam’s Fallacy becomes a real and inescapable part of the experience of life” (Foley
While the two did propose several changes to the theory there were no revisions radical enough to relabel their adaptation, and so, rather than creating a new school of economics, they built onto the already present classical economic theory. The outcome of their adaption was what Foley dubbed a “gloomy science” (Foley 45). Relationships were distinguished to attempt to predict the growth of Earth’s population and its effects on the economy, specifically involving agriculture, the labor theory of value, and technological advances. These theories put a more dismal spin on Smith’s original ideas and eventually reached the conclusion “that the majority of humanity must of mathematical necessity live in great enough misery and poverty to stabilize the total population through a high mortality rate” (Foley 51). Building on this, Malthus concluded that charity for the poor was fruitless, as it only encouraged the reproduction of more poor. This gloomy train of logic is one that often comes from classical liberalism. Adam’s Fallacy becomes apparent when this logic is dissected. As Foley explains it, “The logic of commodity exchange is opposed to moral logic in both its principles and its conclusions. But more important, the reality of commodity exchange and its laws tend to defeat moral action. Thus Adam’s Fallacy becomes a real and inescapable part of the experience of life” (Foley