Bernard Sève 1951: BLOG DE FILOSOFÍA DE CAYETANO ACUÑA.

 Bernard Sève 1951

foto

Bernard Sève

Bernard Sève (Clermont-Ferrand, Francia) es profesor de Filosofía y Estética en la Universidad de Lille, Francia, desde septiembre de 2013. Sus áreas de investigación abarcan la historicidad, los instrumentos, la literatura, la música, la filosofía del arte y el tiempo, principalmente.

Estudia en la École normale supérieure (1970-1974), en la Schola Cantorum (1980-1983), así como en la Universidad de París I Panthéon-Sorbonne, realizando en esta última el Máster en Filosofía con la tesis Demostraciones Catholicae y la Génesis del pensamiento leibniziano (1972), además del doctorado en Filosofía con Más allá del escepticismo: 

Montaigne y la cuestión de las reglas de la mente, el 4 de marzo de 2006. Asimismo, el 2 de diciembre de ese mismo año adquiere el HDR (Habilitación para la Investigación Directa) de la Universidad de París I Panthéon-Sorbonne con la investigación Racionalidades argumentativas y racionalidades artísticas: investigación sobre las técnicas de obras filosóficas y obras musicales.

Las investigaciones de Sève se centran en la filosofía del arte, incluida la filosofía de la música (papel y estado de los instrumentos musicales, música y tiempo, proceso de cita y reutilización, sonido y música, música e historicidad), la relación entre filosofía y literatura, la cuestión de los usos cognitivos y estéticos de listas y tablas de doble entrada; y por otro lado, en el pensamiento de Michel de Montaigne (Montaigne más allá del escepticismo, la cuestión de la mente y las reglas, la argumentación y la escritura literaria, los usos de Montaigne en la historia de la filosofía, las textualidades de Montaigne, estética de Montaigne). 

Ha impartido clases y seminarios sobre «Theodor Adorno», «La dialéctica de las obras y la historia», «Las artes de la conversación», «Técnicas corporales, técnicas de lenguaje y técnicas de materiales en las artes» y «La noción de presentación estética», entre otros.

Durante el período de 2007 a 2015 ha sido jefe del Máster en Filosofía, subdirector de la Facultad de Filosofía, miembro del CEVU-CFVU, miembro del Consejo de Laboratorio (STL), miembro del Consejo del Departamento de Filosofía, miembro del Consejo del UFR Humanities, jefe del Seminario de UFR Humanities, presidente de la comisión VAP 85 para el Departamento de Filosofía y para el CFMI (Centro de formación de los músicos intervinientes, Lille 3); y durante 2015 y 2016 ha sido Líder de STL Ax 3 («Estándares, acción, creación»), y dentro de este eje, del tema 2: «Imaginación y creación: artes y literatura», así como miembro de la Junta laboratorio (STL), miembro del Consejo del Departamento de Filosofía, jefe del Seminario de Humanidades de la UFR, presidente del comité VAP 85 para el Departamento de Filosofía y para el CFMI (Centro de formación de los oradores de los músicos, Lille 3).

Cuenta con diversas publicaciones en forma de artículo, libro o capítulo de libro, entre las que destacan :

«Un demonio en los oídos» (Dinar, nº 2, 1997); 

«Kant (1724-1804): felicidad y religión dentro de los límites de la moralidad» (en Historia razonada de la filosofía moral y política, París, 

La Découverte 2001); 

La cuestión filosófica de la existencia de Dios (Presses Universitaires de France, 2010); así como 

El instrumento musical, un estudio filosófico (Barcelona, Acantilado 2018), principalmente.

TODOS LOS PODERES A LA IGLESIA:

LINK

https://www.elmundo.es/papel/futuro/2018/12/21/5c17d84721efa006668b4604.html

Stanford Encyclopedy of Philosophy

Stanford Encyclopedy of Philosophy:

Philosophy of Science in Latin America

First published Wed Dec 2, 2015

Ever since philosophy of science began as a professional field in the late 1940s, many contributions from Latin America have joined the forefront of the international debate. This article aims to provide an overview of philosophy of science in the subcontinent. The primary focus is on contributions produced in Latin America by thinkers living in the region, with an emphasis on “mainstream philosophy of science”—a discipline centered in the study of scientific knowledge, metaphysics, methodology, and values, broadly analytic in style, as exemplified by works published in such major journals as Philosophy of Science, Erkenntnis, The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, and Studies in the History and Philosophy of Science.

This entry has six parts. Section 1 provides historical background. Sections 2 through 5 are devoted to philosophy of science in various regions of the subcontinent (going roughly) from north to south. The final section briefly considers some of the difficulties and prospects for philosophy of science in Latin America. Effort is made to provide an even-handed and objective picture, but of course only a selective sketch is possible, made of choices influenced by the author’s interpretation of the field.
...

4.3 Peru

Activity in Peru started early in the 1950s, as attested by gatherings organized at Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos (UNMSM, established in 1551, thus the oldest continuosly operating university in the Americas) and Sociedad Peruana de Filosofía, both in Lima. Broad interest is also reflected in articles published in the 1950s and 1960s in the weekly literary supplement of “El Comercio” by Oscar Miró-Quesada, Francisco Miró-Quesada, and other intellectuals interested in logic, science and mathematics.

Francisco Miró-Quesada, the country’s leading philosopher, is one of the pioneers in the development of modern philosophical logic and science studies in Latin America, where he has indefatigably encouraged hope in the power of human reason. Miró-Quesada taught at UNMSM for more than two decades, and then at Universidad Cayetano Heredia (UPCH) and other centers in the country. He also headed institutes for philosophical research, first at Universidad de Lima, and subsequently at Universidad Ricardo Palma. Miró-Quesada is the author of numerous works in the area of philosophy of science, including a book in the philosophy of mathematics, Filosofía de las Matemáticas (1954). He has also been a champion of research in logic in the region (it was Miró-Quesada who suggested to name Newton da Costa’s approach “paraconsistent logic”, which he helped to promote). Miró-Quesada’s most heartfelt project focuses on the study of human reason, regarded as the capacity to reach truth, broadly understood, as outlined in his preliminary book Apuntes para una teoría de la razón (1962), followed in 2013 by Esquema de una teoría de la razón, in which Miró-Quesada discusses the pursuit of rational validity in logic, science, metaphysics, and ethical theory.

In the early1970s, young faculty trained in Europe and the United States expanded and updated the philosophical study of science in the country, particularly at UNMSM. Timely contributions were made, especially by Luis Piscoya (philosophy of psychology and general philosophy of science), Juan Abugattas (philosophy of science), Julio-Cesar Sanz-Elguera (philosophy of science), and David Sobrevilla (philosophy of the social sciences). Ever since, at San Marcos, Luís Piscoya has been working on the interface between philosophy of science and education; he is the author of Investigación científica y educacional: un enfoque epistemológico (1995), and numerous papers (e.g., Piscoya 1993). In the late 1970s, an innovative program in philosophy opened at UPCH, one of the leading research universities in the sub-continent. Under Francisco Miró-Quesada, numerous international workshops, seminars and courses took place in Lima as part of this venture. From the late 1980s on, activity at UPCH continued through a program named “Scientific Thought”, headed by Alberto Cordero, with the collaboration of Sandro D’Onofrio and other faculty. As the century came to a close, philosophy of science regained strength at UNMSM, where a post-graduate program in the discipline opened in the early 1990s under Julio Sanz. This program was subsequently led for many years by Oscar Augusto García Zárate, who now presides a research center for analytic philosophy (Centro de Estudios de Filosofía Analítica—CESFIA) and also directs the journal Analítica; his scholarly works include García Zárate 2001 and 2007. At UNMSM activity in the field has growing support among young faculty, particularly David Villena (who also teaches at Universidad Antonio Ruíz de Montoya, also in Lima).

Interest in the discipline is also rising at other centers, notably Peru’s main Catholic University (Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú—PUCP). Although long associated with the study of phenomenology and existentialism, PUCP’s institutional focus has expanded in recent years, thanks in part to the incorporation of faculty with degrees from English-speaking universities, who are encouraging analytically oriented work at PUCP. Chief among these is Pablo Quintanilla, who has a Ph.D. in philosophy from the University of Virginia and a M.A. from King’s College, London. Quintanilla’s main interests lie in naturalism and the philosophy of mind and language, also in the history of ideas in Latin America; on the first two areas his recent publications include Quintanilla 2006, 2011, and 2013. He heads Mente y Lenguage, a unit for the naturalistic study of mind and language that hosts regular meetings and short international courses. In philosophy of science, selected papers from seminars and workshops organized by this group are collected in the volume Cognición Social y Lenguaje (Quintanilla 2014). Also at PUCP, Sandro D’Onofrio (Ph.D. SUNY, Buffalo) specializes in medieval philosophy, with a concentration in medieval and early modern science; in addition, he leads an interdisciplinary group focused on applications of philosophy of science to jurisprudence and real-life legal issues.

Link

Fundamental concepts: Eugen von Böhm-Bawerk

Eugen von Böhm-Bawerk was born in Brno, under the control of the Austro-Hungarian, February 12, 1851 by aristocratic family of civil servants. When he finished his law studies at the University of Vienna, followed the family tradition and joined the government service in the Austrian Ministry of Finance.

While studying law at the University of Vienna, at age 20, he read Principles of Economics, the prominent economist, Carl Menger, and was captivated by these ideas the rest of his life. When he finished his doctorate, in 1875, began his studies to teach economics and economic policy.

From 1881-1889, he joined the University of Innsbruck and was appointed professor in 1885 and in 1889, he was appointed advisor at the Ministry of Finance where he represented the government in the lower house of parliament.

During this period momentum, in 1889, the new tax law direct taxes because, until then, the tax burden of the Empire was on production, significantly discouraging investment in productive activities. Subsequently took over as Minister of Finance of Austria in 1895 and then between 1900 and 1904. During his time as Minister, fought fiercely in favor of keeping its currency link to gold price in favor of keeping the state budget balanced, as opposed to government spending on national projects. He returned to the University of Innsbruck where he remained until his death, with outstanding students as Joseph Schumpeter and Ludwig von Mises.

Professor Böhm-Bawerk died in Vienna, Austria, on August 27, 1914.

Main Projects and Contributions

From 1881-1889, he published two of the three volumes of his magnum opus, Capital and Interest, dedicated to financial issues. The first volume was published in 1884 under the title of History and Critique of Interest Theories (History & Criticism of theories of interest), a comprehensive analysis of the interest and its uses. He also studied the theories of Carl Menger time, which analyzes the different preferences that consumers place on different days of consumption, differentiating immediate consumption delay the consumption preference.

During the 1880s and 1890s, he wrote notable critical against the economic theories of Karl Marx, becoming number one enemy of the Communists. His approach was that the capitalist system did not exploit the worker, the foundation of Marxist theories of labor value, explaining that exploitation theory ignores the time of production, where the capitalists help income workers, before the production generate income.

His second volume was published in 1889 under the title, Positive Theory of Capital (Positive Theory of Capital) focused on the production time analysis of the economy and interest that these delays created as a result of the investment needed to finance the processes of production, inventory and work in progress.

As part of the second volume came Value and Price (value and price) which elaborates on the principles of Carl Menger utility of his Principles of Economics, developing the idea of subjective value where goods have value only if consumers want them. These ideas were developed further in the third volume published in 1921 with the title of Further Essays on Capital and Interest (More essays on principal and interest).

The impact of Böhm-Bawerk today

Professor Böhm-Bawerk was a great promoter of the theories of marginality, the concept of marginal utility and interest analysis and production times were great impetus to the development of corporate finances.

Eugen von Böhm-Bawerk was one of the leading members of the Austrian school of economics—an approach to economic thought founded by Carl Menger and augmented by Knut Wicksell, Ludwig von Mises, Friedrich A. Hayek, and Sir John Hicks. Böhm-Bawerk’s work became so well known that before World War I, his Marxist contemporaries regarded the Austrians as their typical bourgeois, intellectual enemies. His theories of interest and capital were catalysts in the development of economics, but today his original work receives little attention.

Böhm-Bawerk gave three reasons why interest rates are positive. First, people’s marginal utility of income will fall over time because they expect higher income in the future. Second, for psychological reasons the marginal utility of a good declines with time. For both reasons, which economists now call “positive time-preference,” people are willing to pay positive interest rates to get access to resources in the present, and they insist on being paid interest if they are to give up such access. Economists have accepted both as valid reasons for positive time-preference.

But Böhm-Bawerk’s third reason—the “technical superiority of present over future goods”—was more controversial and harder to understand. Production, he noted, is roundabout, meaning that it takes time. It uses capital, which is produced, to transform nonproduced factors of production—such as land and labor—into output. Roundabout production methods mean that the same amount of input can yield a greater output. Böhm-Bawerk reasoned that the net return to capital is the result of the greater value produced by roundaboutness.

An example helps illustrate the point. As the leader of a primitive fishing village, you are able to send out the townspeople to catch enough fish, with their bare hands, to ensure the village’s survival for one day. But if you forgo consumption of fish for one day and use that labor to produce nets, hooks, and lines—capital—each fisherman can catch more fish the following day and the days thereafter. Capital is productive.

Further investment in capital, argued Böhm-Bawerk, increases roundaboutness; that is, it lengthens the production period. On this basis Böhm-Bawerk concluded that the net physical productivity of capital will lead to positive interest rates even if the first two reasons do not hold.

Although his theory of capital is one of the cornerstones of Austrian economics, modern mainstream economists pay no attention to Böhm-Bawerk’s analysis of roundaboutness. Instead, they accept Irving Fisher’s approach of just assuming that there are investment opportunities that make capital productive. Nevertheless, Böhm-Bawerk’s approach helped to pave the way for modern interest theory.

Böhm-Bawerk was also one of the first economists to discuss Karl Marx’s views seriously. He argued that interest does not exist due to exploitation of workers. Workers would get the whole of what they helped produce only if production were instantaneous. But because production is roundabout, he wrote, some of the product that Marx attributed to workers must go to finance this roundaboutness, that is, must go to capital. Böhm-Bawerk noted that interest would have to be paid no matter who owned the capital. Mainstream economists still accept this argument.

Böhm-Bawerk was born in Vienna and studied law at the university there. After teaching at the University of Innsbruck and serving in the civil service, he was appointed minister of finance during the years 1895, 1897, and 1900. He left the ministry in 1904 and taught economics at the University of Vienna until his death in 1914.

________________________________________
Selected Works
1890. Capital and Interest. London: Macmillan. Translated by William Smart. Reprint, 1959. Available online at: http://www.econlib.org/library/BohmBawerk/bbCI.html
1891. The Positive Theory of Capital. London: Macmillan. Translated by William Smart. Available online at: http://www.econlib.org/library/BohmBawerk/bbPTC.html
1962. Shorter Classics. South-Holland, Ill.: Libertarian Press.

 Reference
http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/bios/BohmBawerk.html
Reference Blog Salmón 
http://www.elblogsalmon.com/economistas-notables/economists-notables-eugen-von-bohm-bawerk

Fundamental Concepts: Gary S. Backer.

Fundamental Concepts: Gary S. Backer.

Gary S. Becker received the 1992 Nobel Prize in economics for “having extended the domain of economic theory to aspects of human behavior which had previously been dealt with—if at all—by other social science disciplines such as sociology, demography and criminology.”

Becker’s unusually wide applications of economics started early. In 1955 he wrote his doctoral dissertation at the University of Chicago on the economics of DISCRIMINATION. Among other things, Becker successfully challenged the Marxist view that discrimination helps the person who discriminates. Becker pointed out that if an employer refuses to hire a productive worker simply because of skin color, that employer loses out on a valuable opportunity. In short, discrimination is costly to the person who discriminates.

Becker showed that discrimination will be less pervasive in more competitive industries because companies that discriminate will lose market share to companies that do not. He also presented evidence that discrimination is more pervasive in more-regulated, and therefore less-competitive, industries. The idea that discrimination is costly to the discriminator is common sense among economists today, and that is due to Becker.

In the early 1960s Becker moved on to the fledgling area of HUMAN CAPITAL. One of the founders of the concept (the other being THEODORE SCHULTZ), Becker pointed out what again seems like common sense but was new at the time: EDUCATION is an INVESTMENT. Education adds to our human capital just as other investments add to physical capital. For more on this, see Becker’s article, “Human Capital,” in this encyclopedia.)

One of Becker’s insights is that time is a major cost of investing in education. Possibly that insight led him to his next major area, the study of the allocation of time within a family. Applying the economist’s concept of OPPORTUNITY COST, Becker showed that as market wages rose, the cost to married women of staying home would rise. They would want to work outside the home and economize on household tasks by buying more appliances and fast food.

Not even CRIME escaped Becker’s keen analytical mind. In the late 1960s he wrote a trail-blazing article whose working assumption is that the decision to commit crime is a function of the costs and benefits of crime. From this assumption he concluded that the way to reduce crime is to raise the probability of punishment or to make the punishment more severe. His insights into crime, like his insights on discrimination and human capital, helped spawn a new branch of economics.

In the 1970s Becker extended his insights on allocation of time within a family, using the economic approach to explain the decisions to have children and to educate them, and the decisions to marry and to divorce.

Becker was a professor at Columbia University from 1957 to 1969. Except for that period, he has spent his entire career at the University of Chicago, where he holds joint appointments in the departments of economics and sociology. Becker won the John Bates Clark Award of the American Economic Association in 1967 and was president of that association in 1987.

Selected Works
1965. “A Theory of the Allocation of Time.” Economic Journal 40, no. 299:
1968. “Crime and Punishment: An Economic Approach.” Journal of Political Economy 76, no. 2:
1971. The Economics of Discrimination. 2d ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
1975. Human Capital. 2d ed. New York: Columbia University Press.
1981. Treatise on the Family. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Published in the The Concise Encyclopedia of Economics.

JEROME BENTHAM: FUNDAMENTAL CONCEPTS ABOUT ECONOMY

 Fundamental Concepts: Jerome Bentham

Bentham's time, are the times of the industrial revolution, wars of independence and the formation of the nascent Latin American states. From the standpoint of legal and economic is the exponent of the rational mind state and mercantile bourgeois ideology, inspired by a practical economic enlightened individualism. 

In The Psychology of Economic Man Bentham ontological vision is not Aristotle's conception of happiness metaphysics but earthly happiness, which is achieved to the extent that access to wealth, money, and in this task the State, laws, the economy must play their role to ensure the safety of Social Welfare. Bentham proclaimed Happiness is the 'greatest happiness of the greatest number which gives the ex tent of right and wrong. 

The principle of autopreferencia, ie "the interest of the very consideration prevails over all others combined. The happiness of the greatest number as a measure of right and wrong, is the result of the single sum regardless of social solidarity. According to the author the psychology of economic man is motivated by the interest in the possession of things or property and causes happiness, desire, hope, aversion to pain, the action, the will and inclination. 

Interest is the impulse that moves the person to action, which is based on the means to achieve their goals. 

Interests, will and action is the mechanical triad humans to reach happiness. However, the relationship is not mechanical, it requires incentives or stimuli, to reach the service of others. This led to the field, is of great significance in occupational psychology. 

By the principle of self-esteem, the more urgent is the need felt by a man to gain the kindness and good will of others, more energetic and strong will their efforts to get them, and if the need is less, efforts will be less intense. Being cautious means being carrier and defender of the principle of autopreferencia and estimation. 

To exercise the principle of autopreferencia basis of self-preservation is essential to the work, hard work and love of work, through which wealth is reached, in this sense unproductive leisure Bentham rejects the material and intellectual field. Never any human group is determined by other considerations than your concept of what is, to a maximum degree, beneficial to their interests purely self-respect. 

As if there were no such qualities like selflessness, philanthropy, or the disposition to self-sacrifice, the entire human species ", the author is convinced that" what prevails among men is the habit of autopreferencia, whose influence is powerful, steady, uniform, permanent and widespread human body.
 
In Bentham is more raw exposure advocacy of money as the only source of happiness. In real life the richest men are not necessarily happier, nor men who work harder, necessarily those who make more money. For Bentham as noted above money is the source of the greatest happiness which is equivalent to profit. Its design is essential arithmetic money in political economy. For him the maximum equality exists only in physics, among men equality refers only practicable, which can be expressed in the law. Equality requires that wages be raised to the maximum work.For Bentham the interest of the community is one of the more general expressions can be found in the phraseology of morals, it is not surprising that its meaning is often lost. 

When has a meaning, it is this. The community is a fictitious body, composed of individuals who are treated as if they were its members. The interest of the community then what is? - The sum of the interests of various members that make up 

It is vain to talk of the interest of the community, without understanding what is the interest of the individual. He says things that promotes an interest, or that is in the interest of the individual, when it tends to increase the sum total of his pleasures: or, what comes to the same thing, to diminish the sum total of their sentences » 

Bentham conceived that society should be governed by a set of laws or Pannomio, will of a person or people, not the will of popular sovereignty. The government and laws should ensure universal security through the production of materials, so as to ensure security, subsistence and equality. The provident principle aims security, securing livelihoods, maximization of wealth and high inequality.  

The purpose of civil and criminal laws to ensure the safety of property.Laws need to combat crimes against people and crimes against national wealth. It is closely articulated legal system of political economy. 

The positive conception of Bentham in relation to politics and morality is based on research based on experimentation and observation, states in this regard that "a theory, indeed, it is not good to your specifications while not receiving, in his chance, confirmation of experience. 

Betham economic thought, embodies more raw pragmatism mercantilist mentality - capitalist, at a time of economic history that this system is being developed as the rationalist modernization model in England. 

Bentham, Jeremy. Philosophy of Economic Science.Bentham, Jeremy. Economic writings. Selection and foreword by W. Stark. Economic Culture Fund. Mexico, 1965.

Reference for his Philosophy
......................................

La época de Bentham, son los tiempos de la revolución industrial, de las guerras independentistas y la formación de los nacientes estados latinoamericanos. Desde el punto de vista jurídico y económico es el exponente de la mentalidad racional del estado y la ideología burguesa mercantilista, inspirado en un individualismo ilustrado económico práctico.

En La Psicología del hombre económico la visión ontológica de Bentham no es la concepción aristotélica de la felicidad metafísica, sino la felicidad terrena, que se logra en la medida que se accede a la riqueza, al dinero, y en esta tarea el Estado, las leyes, la economía deben cumplir su función de velar por la seguridad del Bienestar Social. La felicidad que proclama Bentham, es la «mayor felicidad del mayor número lo que da la me dida de lo justo y lo injusto.

El principio de autopreferencia, es decir, «el interés de la propia consideración predomina sobre todos los demás en conjunto. La felicidad del mayor número como medida de lo justo y lo injusto, es resultante de la sumatoria individual independientemente de la solidaridad social. Según el autor la sicología del hombre económico se halla animada por el interés por la posesión de cosas o bienes y le produce la felicidad, el deseo, la esperanza, la adversión al dolor, la acción, la voluntad y la inclinación.

El interés es el impulso que mueve a la persona a la acción, quien se apoya en los medios para lograr sus objetivos.

Interés, voluntad y acción es la triada mecánica en los seres humanos para llegar a la felicidad. Sin embargo la relación no es mecánica, se requiere de los incentivos o estímulos, para alcanzar el servicio de los demás. Esto llevado al campo de trabajo, es de gran significado en la sicología laboral.

Por el principio de propia estimación, mientras más urgente es la necesidad que siente un hombre de obtener la bondad y la buena voluntad de los demás, más enérgicos y firmes serán sus esfuerzos para conseguirlas, y si la necesidad es menor, los esfuerzos serán menos intensos. Ser prudente, implica ser portador y defensor del principio de autopreferencia y estimación.

Para ejercitar el principio de la autopreferencia base de la propia conservación es indispensable el trabajo, la laboriosidad y el amor al trabajo, por medio de los cuales se alcanza la riqueza, en este sentido Bentham rechaza el ocio improductivo en el campo material e intelectual.

Jamás ningún grupo humano está determinado por ninguna otra consideración que no sea su concepto de lo que es, en un máximo grado, beneficioso para sus intereses puramente de propia estimación.

Como si no existieran tales cualidades como el desinterés, la filantropía, o la disposición hacia la abnegación, en toda la especie humana», el autor se halla convencido que «lo que prevalece entre los hombres es el hábito de la autopreferencia, cuya influencia es poderosa, constante, uniforme, permanente y más generalizada ente la humanidad

En Bentham se encuentra la exposición más cruda de apología del dinero como única fuente de felicidad. En la vida real los hombres más ricos no necesariamente son los más felices, ni los hombres que trabajan más duro, necesariamente son los que ganan más dinero. Para Bentham como se anotó anteriormente el dinero es la fuente de la mayor felicidad que es equivalente a utilidad. Su concepción es la aritmética del dinero esencial en la economía política. Para él la máxima igualdad no existe sino en la física, entre los hombres se habla únicamente de igualdad practicable, que se puede expresar en la ley. La igualdad requiere que el salario del trabajo sea elevado al máximo.

Para Bentham el interés de la comunidad es una de las expresiones más generales que pueden encontrarse en la fraseología de la moral; no es extraño que su significado se pierda a menudo.

Cuando tiene un significado, es éste. La comunidad es un cuerpo ficticio, compuesto de personas individuales que están consideradas como si fueran sus miembros. El interés de la comunidad ¿entonces qué és? - la suma de los intereses de distintos miembros que la componen

Es en vano hablar del interés de la comunidad, sin comprender lo que es el interés del individuo. Se dice de una cosas que promueve el interés, o que es por el interés del individuo, cuando tiende a aumentar la suma total de sus placeres: o, lo que viene a ser lo mismo, a disminuir la suma total de sus penas»

Bentham, concibe que la sociedad debe estar regida por un conjunto de leyes o Pannomio, voluntad de una persona o personas, no de la voluntad de la soberanía popular. El gobierno y las leyes deben garantizar la seguridad universal, mediante la producción de materiales, de tal manera que se garantice la seguridad, la subsistencia e igualdad. El principio providente de la seguridad tiene como objetivos, el aseguramiento de la subsistencia, la elevación al máximo de la abundancia y la mínima desigualdad. El objetivo de las leyes civiles y penales es garantizar la seguridad de las propiedades.

Las leyes deben combatir los delitos contra la población y los delitos contra la riqueza nacional. Es sistema jurídico está íntimamente articulado a la economía política.

La concepción positiva de Bentham con relación a la política y la moral se sustenta en la investigación basada en la experimentación y la observación, afirma al respecto que «una teoría, en verdad, no es buena hasta en tanto que sus indicaciones no reciban, en su oportunidad, la confirmación de la experiencia.

El pensamiento económico de Betham, encarna el más crudo pragmatismo de la mentalidad mercantilista - capitalista, en un momento de la historia económica en que este sistema se viene desarrollando como el modelo de modernización racionalista en Inglaterra.

BENTHAM, Jeremy.  Filosofía de la Ciencia Económica.
BENTHAM, Jeremy. Escritos económicos. Selección y prólogo de W. Stark. Fondo de Cultura Económica. México, 1965.