The Ethical Embeddedness of the Economic Inequality Debate

Abstract How do scholars formulate arguments about economic inequality? What is the role of empirical analysis? In what ways, if any, is the debate informed by ethical considerations? In this paper, we address these questions by evaluating one of the main arguments in Thomas Piketty’s 2014 book Capi...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inJournal of business ethics
Main Authors Ketokivi, Mikko, Fosse, Sebastien M., Kawalek, Peter
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published 21.05.2024
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:Abstract How do scholars formulate arguments about economic inequality? What is the role of empirical analysis? In what ways, if any, is the debate informed by ethical considerations? In this paper, we address these questions by evaluating one of the main arguments in Thomas Piketty’s 2014 book Capital in the Twenty-First Century , along with its endorsements and rebuttals. Applying Stephen Toulmin’s model of arguments to Piketty unearths a complex argument structure that must be understood for an evaluation to be possible. Of particular importance are the warrants that Piketty used to justify his conclusions from the empirical material. Our analysis revealed that the most influential rebuttals were targeted not at Piketty’s empirical inferences but the way he used these inferences to justify his claims. We also found value judgments to be an essential part of the justification process, making Piketty’s claims ultimately embedded in ethical considerations. We conclude that value judgments are intrinsic to scholarly arguments not only in economic inequality debates but also more broadly.
ISSN:0167-4544
1573-0697
DOI:10.1007/s10551-024-05680-5