Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Skip to main content
Josiah Tucker, who was the Anglican dean of Gloucester from 1758 until his death in 1799, is best known today as a controversialist, a political economist and a lesser contemporary of Adam Smith. Little attention has been paid, however,... more
Josiah Tucker, who was the Anglican dean of Gloucester from 1758 until his death in 1799, is best known today as a controversialist, a political economist and a lesser contemporary of Adam Smith. Little attention has been paid, however, to the important relationship between his religious writings and his wider economic thought. This article addresses this lack of attention in two ways: first by demonstrating the link between Tucker's conception of civil and religious liberty and his "science" of political economy, and second by drawing sustained attention to his economic adaptation and reformulation of the moral philosophy of Bishop Joseph Butler, Tucker's ecclesiastical mentor from 1739 to 1752. Emphasizing Butler and Tucker's views on the traditional Christian virtue of charity, and the moral duty of the rich towards the poor, the article suggests that both clergymen were proponents of a sociability-based, neo-Stoic conception of human nature, which was not only compatible with, but also dependent upon, the established Anglican Church and state and the predominantly Whig commercial order. In consequence, Tucker's political economy was premised on the unavoidability of social subordination and economic inequality as necessary hallmarks of modern commercial society. Accordingly, the article closes with a brief discussion of Tucker's "Butlerian" assessment and rejection of the "anti-social" doctrine of individual natural rights, associated with the popular radicalism of the American and French Revolutions in the latter half of the eighteenth century.
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/23801883.2018.1492422 Istvan Hont’s classic work on the theoretical links between the seventeenth-century natural jurists Hugo Grotius and Samuel Pufendorf and the eighteenth-century... more
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/23801883.2018.1492422

Istvan Hont’s classic work on the theoretical links between the seventeenth-century natural jurists Hugo Grotius and Samuel Pufendorf and the eighteenth-century Scottish political economists remains a popular trope among intellectual and economic historians of various stamps. Despite this, a common criticism levelled at Hont remains his relative lack of engagement with the relationship between religion and economics in the early modern period. This paper challenges this aspect of Hont’s narrative by drawing attention to an alternative, albeit complementary, assessment of the natural jurisprudential heritage of eighteenth-century British political economy. Specifically, the article attempts to map on to Hont’s thesis the Christian Stoic interpretation of Grotius and Pufendorf which has gained greater currency in recent years. In doing so, the paper argues that Grotius and Pufendorf’s contributions to the ‘unsocial sociability’ debate do not necessarily lead directly to the Scottish school of political economists, as is commonly assumed. Instead, it contends that a reconsideration of Grotius and Pufendorf as neo-Stoic theorists, particularly via scrutiny of their respective adaptations of the traditional Stoic theory of oikeiosis, steers us towards the heart of the early English ‘clerical’ Enlightenment.
Chapter Two of my completed PhD thesis in Intellectual History awarded in 2016, entitled ‘‘Providence and Political Economy’: Josiah Tucker’s Providential Argument for Free Trade’.
Research Interests:
Peter Xavier Price, who is based at the Sussex Centre for Intellectual History, responds to Neil Paul Cummins' 2010 book, 'Is the Human Species Special?: Why human-induced global warming could be in the interests of life'. He seeks to... more
Peter Xavier Price, who is based at the Sussex Centre for Intellectual History, responds to Neil Paul Cummins' 2010 book, 'Is the Human Species Special?: Why human-induced global warming could be in the interests of life'. He seeks to explore and challenge many of the epistemological suppositions undergirding the central ideas of 'Is the Human Species Special?'. Why, the author speculates, does the application of history play such a minor role in considerations of the supposed uniqueness of humanity? Likewise, can mankind's sense of its own historical nature pave the way towards a better informed and responsible future? Questions such as these, amongst many others, form the basis for this short book, in which humanity's eternal struggle to find inherent meaning in its surrounding world – as well as humanity's place within it – is reconsidered.