Moral and Community Order

What is Metaeconomics?

Metaeconomics is an empathy-based, science- and humanities-grounded alternative to mainstream Microeconomics. Instead of assuming only ego-based self-interest as in Single Interest Theory (SIT) in Microeconomics, Metaeconomics uses Dual Interest Theory (DIT), which explicitly includes empathy-based shared other-interest as an internal part of human behavior.

What is Dual Interest Theory (DIT)?

Dual Interest Theory (DIT) holds that human behavior arises from two interacting motivations: ego-based self-interest (relating to Incentive) and empathy-based shared other-interest (holding the Ethic). Economic stability depends on balancing ego and empathy, self and other(shared)-interest, incentive and ethic—rather than privileging one over the other.

How does Dual Interest Theory (DIT) in Metaeconomics relate to Adam Smith?

Adam Smith emphasized that moral sentiments—the Ethic—must temper self-interest. Metaeconomics formalizes Smith’s insight using modern behavioral science, treating Smith’s two major works as one integrated argument: Wealth and Sentiment, Self and Other(shared)-interest, Incentive and Ethic. The Ethic is essential for tempering the Incentive, and therefore for economic efficiency and market viability.

Writing convention?

In Metaeconomics, the symbol “&” is used deliberately to emphasize that paired terms are joint, interdependent, and nonseparable, not merely additive. Expressions such as ego & empathy, self & other(shared)-interest, wealth & sentiment, and incentive & ethic denote co-arising drivers of human behavior and economic outcomes, consistent with Dual Interest Theory (DIT). Where “and” appears, it carries this same strong meaning; the use of “&” simply makes the jointness more explicit.

Moral Order

Regarding the notion of a Market, which is A kind of Decision Forum, one that produces a Price, which in a Market-only framing is Value, we need to keep in mind that it rests heavily in a set of values and beliefs largely characterized by what we might call the Moral Order, all of which are mainly about accommodating the Ego based Self-interest, following Hayek (1948):

Access by every individual to the Market, such that everyone can have an influence on the Price
Impossibility of knowing what is best for individuals ex ante (i.e., the limited reasoning and capacity of individuals) so planning has minimal use, because what is correct individual action cannot be known with much accuracy due to the complexity relative to human ability,
Spontaneous ordering of the economic (producing and marketing) system, as well as the underlying institutional arrangements, especially law, albeit recognizing the need for actively engaging in conversation about the Moral Order,
Institutions behind this spontaneous order arise primarily in the common law, and are mainly aided and not primarily motivated through legislative law,
Government functions under the common law,
Need for private individual property held in perpetuity to ensure investment, and to ensure free expression of individual values and beliefs, something akin to “full and liberal ownership” (see Bromley, 1978, who draws upon Honore),
Protection of the domain of the individual with private property, to ensure a satisfactory, maximum amount of independence among individuals,
Mutually beneficial interactions, or mutual gain, which contributes to the stability of the social order,
All coercive institutions are equally applied to all
Seek ways to bring information (values and beliefs, knowledge) from every individual into the process, albeit the Market is the favored Forum
Values evolve in process (as beliefs change) through time,
Each individual has a moral obligation to accept what the valuing process... the Market Forum... suggests,
When results go bad, a minimum security of income is ensured
Well-educated and well-informed population

Moral Community

The Moral Community, on the other hand, goes beyond just the Market Forum to recognize the legitimacy of Other Forums arising out of Government, as in the Forums operating within and among the Administrative, Legislative and Judicial branches of the US Government. These Other Forums also reveal Value, which in turn will generally work to influence Price in the Market. And, while it includes many of the features of a Moral Order, it goes beyond it, to recognize a kind of Social Order at work, a higher order, representing the Moral Dimension... the Value on a higher plane... of an economy. The Social Order needs attention in evolving the Moral Community that gives context to the Market. As Commons (1934) said, there is a need to “save capitalism in order to make it good, ” which requires active involvement by large numbers of people in evolving the Moral Community, the shared Other-interest, which then works to temper the Self-interest. Etzioni (1993) has called for “megalogues” for this purpose. In effect, we need to make the invisible hand visible, through Empathy, by continually evolving and updating the moral dimension implicit in said “invisible hand.”

Income and wealth potentially become substantive issues in the Value being expressed, as one cannot express Value in a Market Forum without money. Arguably, money plays less of a role in Other Forums, especially in a truly liberal democracy, in which everyone, no matter one's wealth, can at least theoretically participate. It follows that those with more wealth also have more ability to express their Values in a Market... Prices can be driven up or down in the Market as the demand curves are shifted up with more wealth/income and down with less... albeit those with more wealth are often also better able to influence Government, too. The recent surge of Dark Money, and the current lack of transparency in political donations, is a case in point.

Comparing Moral Order and Moral Community

Proactive and visible...not the invisible hand of the Market Forum, but the visible hand of individuals active in Other Forums... involvement in evolving values/ the moral dimension stands in stark contrast to the strict version of the Moral Order (represented most precisely in writings by Hayek), which supposedly is a kind of natural order (see James Buchanan). To form a Moral Community, rather, there is the need to actively engage the evolution of such order, especially to override the influence of the Status Quo, which then goes beyond the Moral Order to Moral Community.

Related Metaeconomics Concepts

This topic is part of the broader Metaeconomics framework, which uses Dual Interest Theory (DIT) to integrate ego-based self-interest and empathy-based shared other-interest in support of stable, efficient, and humane economic systems—formalizing insights anticipated by Adam Smith. For concise definitions, terminology, and links to related concepts, see the Metaeconomics FAQ hub: https://www.metaeconomics.info/faq-frequently-asked-question

References

Bromley, D. W. 1978. "Property Rules, Liability Rules, and Environmental Economics." Journal of Economic Issues 12 (March):43 – 60.

Etzioni, A. 1993. The Spirit of Community: Rights, Responsibilities and the Communitarian Agenda. New York: Crown Publishing Group.

Hayek, F. A. 1948 (paperback edition 1980). Individualism and Economic Order. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.