Why should we consider Rousseau as an economist?

Catherine Larrère ()

Cahiers d’économie politique / Papers in Political Economy, 2007, issue 53, 115-133

Abstract: The received idea is that he could not miss the science of modernity. But if we investigate what can be considered as the economic thought of Rousseau, we must be distinguish two different lines of thought: one which has to do with the division of labour (to be mostly found in Emile and the second Discourse), the other one, about economics proper, to be found in the Discourse on Political Economy. In this latter work, we see that Rousseau is keen on maintaining the difference between two social spheres: the family and the civil, or political, sphere. There is no possibility, for him, of a universal or uniform pattern of rational behaviour equally valid in both areas. As to division of labour, he sees it not as a means to independence, but, on the contrary, as a way of becoming more and more dependant of the others. That is why economic processes should be submitted to political control in order to be conducive to liberty.

JEL-codes: A12 B11 B31 B41 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2007
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.cairn.info/acheter_article.php?ID_ARTICLE=CEP_053_0115 (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:cpo:journl:y:2007:i:53:p:115-133

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
142 rue du faubourg Saint-Martin. 75010 Paris, France.

Access Statistics for this article

Cahiers d’économie politique / Papers in Political Economy is currently edited by Claire Pignol

More articles in Cahiers d’économie politique / Papers in Political Economy from L'Harmattan
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Carlos Andrés Vasco Correa ().