TO THE PHILOSOPHY OF MORAL ECONOMY: CONCEPTOLOGY OF ANTHROPOCENTRISM (Part I)

Abstract

The article presents authors’ vision of the philosophical platform for building a moral economy as one of the fundamental foundations of the formation of a new economic theory capable of reflecting development trends of the economy and the network society of the first half of the 21st century.

The relevance of a new perspective on moral economy development, in which the vectors, priorities, and hierarchy of socially significant actions and social progress as a whole are changing, is determined by the heated scientific debate and polemic regarding the essence and nature of ecosystem in the new socioeconomic reality. The purpose of the article is to promote a fundamental rethinking of moral economy phenomenon, prerequisites for its formation with an emphasis on people-oriented development, strengthening the role of values, culture, decent work, solidarity, which should establish a new level of social quality in the future. To argue the concept of moral economy, general scientific and special methods of scientific research have been used - theoretical generalization, induction and deduction, logical justification, abstract-logical, historical, hypothetical methods. The elements of novelty are theoretical and methodological concepts regarding the essence and nature of moral economy and evidence confirming the proposed hypothesis of its necessary development as an objective reaction of societies and their leading social forces to the new global reality, which has scientific-technical, socio-economic, demographic and institutional prerequisites. Moral economy’s interpretation in the most general and detailed formulation, as opposed to the “product” approach, is given. The proposed concept of moral economy is revealed through its functions - methodological, socio-economic and institutional; organizational and managerial; worldview. Circumstances and processes that restrain socio-economic relations development on the basis of anthropocentrism and become a kind of “thrombus” on the way to building a new type of economy are singled out.

The true role of culture in the economic sphere in the context of the relationship between culture, ethics and moral economy is revealed. The hypothesis that the unifying link between economy and culture is value is put forward. Values are considered as a resource, motive, source and existential foundation of positive social and labor dynamics. Assumptions are made regarding the parallel between phenomena and processes that generate a shortage of decent work, on the one hand, and development of the economy, which claims the status of “uncultured”, “immoral”, “non-human-centered”, on the other. The expressed hypothesis regarding unidirectionality of the principles of formation and functioning of moral economy and phenomenon of identity is argued. A thesis that the formation of moral economy will accelerate under condition of using the potential of solidarity is substantiated.

REFERENCES

1. Kolot, A. M., & Herasymenko O. O. (2022). Novel formats of labor activity organization: nature, challenges, development trajectories. Economy of Ukraine, 5, 59-76 https://doi.org/10.15407/economyukr.2022.05.059 [in Ukrainian].
2. Kolot, A., & Herasymenko, O. (2016). Values of working life and decent work: the philosophy of cooperation and development. Ukraine: aspects of work, 1-2, 3-13 [in Ukrainian].
3. Kolot, A. M., & Herasymenko O. O. (2021). Work XXI: philosophy of changes, challenges, vectors of development. Kyiv: KNEU named after Vadym Hetman https://doi.org/10.15407/economyukr.2021.02.003 [in Ukrainian].
4. Thompson, E. P. (1971). The Moral Economy of the English Crowd in the XVIII Century. Customs in Common: Studies in Traditional Popular Culture. New York, 185-258.
5. Scott, J. (1977). Moral Economy of the Peasant: Rebellion and Subsistence in Southeast New Haven.
6. Sayer, A. (2004). Moral Economy. Lancaster University, Lancaster.
7. Polanyi, K. (2002). The Great Transformation: The Political and Economic Origins of Our (A. Vasil’eva & A. Shurbeleva, Transl.). St. Petersburg: Aletejja [in Russian].
8. Luhmann, N. (1995). Social Systems. Stanford University Press, Chapter 6.
9. Habermas, J. (1989). The Theory of Communicative Action. 2. Boston.
10. Becker, H. S. (1999). Moral Entrepreneurs: The Creation and Enforcement of Deviant Social Deviance: Readings in Theory and Research. (H. N. Pontell, Ed.). Prentice Hall; Upper Saddle River.
11. Gotz, Norbert (2015). Moral economy: its conceptual history and analytical prospects. Journal of Global Ethics, 11:2, 147-162. https://doi.org/10.1080/17449626.2015.1054556
12. Carrier, J. G. (2018). Moral economy: What’s in a name. Anthropological Theory, 18(1), 18-35. https://doi.org/10.1177/1463499617735259
13. Tugan-Baranovskij, M. I. (1989). Social foundations of cooperation. Moscow: Jekonomika [in Russian].
14. Libanova, E. M. (2012). Sustainable human development: ensuring justice. Ptoukha Institute for Demography and Social Studies, Institute of Economics and Forecasting, Institute of Environmental Economics and Sustainable Development. Uman: Sochinsky, 382 р. [in Ukrainian].
15. Kremen’, V. H. (2010). The philosophy of human-centredness in educational space Kyiv: Ped. dumka [in Ukrainian].
16. Dmytrenko, H. A. (2012). A new management course for Ukraine: conditions of formation and technologies of implementation. NAES of Ukraine, University of Educational Kyiv: DKS Center [in Ukrainian].
17. Zadorozhna, O. G. & Zadorozhny, G. V. (2022). Post-classical economic science: Lectures. Kharkiv: Publishing House “VNNOST” [in Ukrainian].
18. Schwartz, B. (2018). Why we work. (N. Hoin, Transl.). Kharkiv: Vivat [in Ukrainian].
19. Kolot, A. M., Daniuk, V. M., Herasymenko, O. O. et al. (2017). Decent work: imperatives, Ukrainian realities, implementation mechanisms. Kyiv: Vadim Hetman Kyiv National Economic University [in Ukrainian].
20. Florida, Richard (2018). Homo creativus. How a new class is conquering the world. (Maksym Yakovliev, Transl.). Kyiv: Nash format [in Ukrainian].
21. Indset, Anders (2021). The Quantum Economy. Kyiv: ArtHuss [in Ukrainian].
22. Beugelsdijk, S. & Maseland, R. (2016). Culture in Economics: History, Methodological Reflections and Contemporary Applications. (N. V. Avtonomova, Transl., V. S. Avto nomov, Ed.). Petersburg: Publishing House of the Gaidar Institute; Publishing House “International relations”; Faculty of Liberal Arts and Sciences of St. Petersburg State University [in Russian].
23. Kolot, A. M. & Herasymenko, O. O. (2018). Trust as an institute in the mirror of new challenges, imperatives and possibilities of socio-economic development. Social and Labour Relations: Theory and Practice, 2, 8-26 https://doi.org/10.21511/slrtp.8(2).2018.02 [in Ukrainian].
24. Casson, M. (1993). Cultural Determinants of Economic Performance. Journal of Comparative Economics, 17, 418-442. https://doi.org/10.1006/jcec.1993.1033
25. Throsby, D. (2013). Economics and culture (I. Kushnareva, Transl.). Moscow: Publishing house of the Higher School of Economics [in Russian].
26. Mazzukato, Mariana (2021). The Value of Everything. Making and Taking in the Global (N. Afanasov, A. Pavlov, Transl.). Moscow: Publishing house of the Higher School of Economics [in Russian].
27. Fukuyama, Francis (2020). Identity: the demand for dignity and the politics of resentment [in Ukrainian].
28. Lippman, W. (1921). Public Opinion. Wading River, Long Island. 250 p. http://image.sciencenet.cn/olddata/kexue.com.cn/upload/blog/file/2010/11/20101113143833504463.pdf
29. Thomas, W. I., & Thomas, D. S. (1928). Chapter 13. The Methodology of Behavior Study. The Child in America: Behavior Problems and Programs. New York, Alfred A. Knopf, 553-576. https://brocku.ca/MeadProject/Thomas/Thomas_1928_13.html
30. Ostrom, E. (2012). Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective (T. Montian, Transl.). Kyiv: Our time [in Ukrainian].