French philosopher, economist, and politician, developed a type of normative ethics based upon the ideas of personal responsibility.
Bastiat believed that economics is a science based upon consumers as individuals with basic liberties, including the freedom of choice.
As a part of Bastiat's libertarian social philosophy, he believed that women should be able to participate in the political arena.
This informative site, featured in French and English, keeps interested readers up-to-date on the latest news about Bastiat research, as well as features a list of web links, forums and newsgroups that feature Bastiat.
by Thomas J. DiLorenzo
Excerpt:
CLAUDE FREDERIC BASTIAT was a French economist, legislator, and writer who championed private property, free markets, and limited government. Perhaps the main underlying theme of Bastiat's writings was that the free market was inherently a source of "economic harmony" among individuals, as long as government was restricted to the function of protecting the lives, liberties, and property of citizens from theft or aggression. To Bastiat, governmental coercion was only legitimate if it served "to guarantee security of person, liberty, and property rights, to cause justice to reign over all..."
bySheldon Richman
Frederic Bastiat (1801-1850) merits a hallowed place in the annals of political economy. A member of the French Liberal, or laissez-faire, school of economists that included the great J. B. Say, Bastiat marshaled logic, clarity, and exuberant wit in the cause of understanding society, prosperity, and liberty. In a series of brief essays and pamphlets, and a treatise on political economy, Bastiat taught, contra Rousseau, that there is a natural harmonious order to the social world, an order that emanates from the free exchange between human beings driven to satisfy unlimited wants with limited resources. The result is a steady progress in the material well-being of all. Interference with that freedom, and with its corollaries, property and competition, he wrote, leaves people poorer as well as oppressed. This is so because interference bars individuals from the creative action they otherwise would have engaged in. The fruits of the creativity thus forgone are "what is not seen" in any act of intervention...
Is it a good idea to specialize in a single individual philosopher? Simone de Beauvoir? Merleau-Ponty? Irigaray? Or better to specialize in a particular topic, something obscure enough not to attract thousands of people to the questions? It's good to find a topic that is broad enough to insure interest beyond a series of papers. A good topic will gather together a small group of interesting writers/thinkers bringing all sorts of good questions.
Even a single name will draw together a group of names interested in angles and ideas. It's always good to compile a list of people that write on the topic of interest, gather together a bibliography for research and reference. A single figure will always have an array of topics that were or are of interest.
If you do find a philosopher that especially interests you, search out their personal history. Personal journals, both published and unpublished, can be an excellent source of information. Such ontic accounts help to create a sense of living history. Photographs help, too, not only of the philosopher, but of the landscapes and city locales. Novels that were popular at the time can help.
It's also interesting to search out the political events of a particular time whithin which the topic emerges. From world events to local events, if nothing else, it's fun to speculate on what might have influenced a thinker's thought. Trying to bring it close.
About Us | Site Map | Privacy Policy | Contact Us
©2004 erraticimpact.com
A service for the online network of worldwide philosophers Associate sites: contrapose.com, harmonicity.com, ecofeminism.net, panphobia.com, crasis.com, queertheory.com philosophy-books.com
