What Money Is and Ought To Be

Bibliographic Data

ID3099590
AuthorsDavid G Dick (University of Calgary, corresponding author)
Year2021
Volume6
Issue2
Pages293-313
Publication date2021-05-04
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueJournal of Social Ontology (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 2196-9663 • E-ISSN: 2196-9655
PublisherWalter de Gruyter GmbH (PUBLISHER • DE)
DOI10.1515/jso-2020-0033
OpenAlexW3150262388
LanguageEN
Citations received1
References cited21

Teleological thinking about money reasons from what money is for to both how it ought to be used and what forms it should take. One type, found in Aristotle's argument against usury, takes teleological considerations alone to decisively settle normative questions. Another type, found in Locke's argument about monetary durability, takes teleological considerations to contribute to the settling of normative questions, but sees them as one consideration among many. This paper endorses the type made by Locke while rejecting the type made by Aristotle, and identifies further teleological tendencies in the work of Adam Smith and other philosophers

Argument (complex analysis · Epistemology · Normative · Teleological argument · Teleology · Theology · Usury · Chemistry · Economic Theory and Institutions · Philosophical Ethics and Theory · Philosophy · Political Philosophy and Ethics

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access