beurrre

What is Man?

Who asks that question (except Woman!..sorry, sorry, couldn't resist) ?

Who could answer that? God...perhaps.

Economists, of course, have a particular view of man, homo economicus : rational, self-interested individuals as an ideal-type. The absurdity of such a construct is not in question-even if the reasons for his emergence are less easy to ascertain. The simplifications required for theory-'tractability'-spring to mind; the overlap between political and economic liberalism: the disembeded individual, abstract citizen, General Man, precisely, free from (the hierarchies of) society, religion, race and who is invested with rights.

Simple, fundamental motives (self-interest) which at once eliminate both the need for, and explanatory power of, highly contestable and conflic-ridden ethical motivations as well as the dubious and unstable role of the emotions, passions (Albert Hirschman). In any case, 'self-interest' is a self-evident axiom, an 'indisputable fact of experience' (Lionel Robbins), something that cannot, therefore, be falsified or overturned by an appeal to empirical reality. Or, alternatively: 'as if'.

Perhaps the question is redundant. All one can say is what we do, not what we are. But is causality enough? And how can there be a science of behaviour if there's free will, consciousness (as pointed out by the brilliant neo-classical economist, Frank Knight, seventy five years ago)?

What is butter? If in Paris, would this question be intelligible? Who asks such questions except, perhaps, the philosopher? Certainly not the mullah, who would be too busy scoffing it down.