Ethical Review of
Social Sciences
Ethics in the social world
Journal menu
Cover of Ethical Review of Social Sciences, volume 1, issue 2

Moral agency, prudence and the origins of ethical life

Two studies revisit enduring questions about virtue, self-interest, equality and the social origins of morality.

Published
02 February 2026
Articles
2
Access
Open access

Research articles

Search all articles
  1. 01

    Research Article · Pages 1–6

    Adam Smith was Consistent in Both The Theory of Moral Sentiments and The Wealth of Nations on the Role of the Concept of Prudence (Self Interest): Das Utilitarian Economist view is the Problem

    Michael Emmett Brady

    Adam Smith was very consistent in both the Wealth of Nations and in The Theory of Moral Sentiments concerning the role of the virtue of prudence(self-interest) in both books. Like all advocates of virtue ethics, the first virtue that must be mastered had to be the Virtue of Prudence, which required the satisfaction of the necessary condition of being able to take care of oneself and family first, before any other virtue could possibly be attempted, applied and mastered. Smith assumed that readers of the Wealth of Nations had previously read his Theory of Moral Sentiments, so that they understood that the butcher, brewer, and baker all had to succeed financially first before they could consider the interests of others second. Only after a clear and large economic surplus had been built up by the butcher, brewer, and baker from their small businesses would it be possible to meet the interests of others through the practice of the virtue of benevolence. There is simply no contradiction or inconsistency between Smith’s position, made all through The Theory of Moral Sentiments, that prudence is the most important virtue and that all other virtues must come second or after prudence(self-interest) has been successfully deployed first. Smith though it obvious that we get our dinner from the prudent behavior (self-interest or self-love) of the butcher, brewer, and baker and not from the virtue of Benevolence because Benevolence can only be practiced if the butcher, brewer, and baker have been successful in their businesses in amassing a surplus. The butcher, brewer, and baker can’t practice Benevolence if they are suffering losses or merely breaking even. The virtue of benevolence should not be confused with altruism.

  2. 02

    Research Article · Pages 7–18

    The Origin of Morality and the Making of the Moral Predicament

    Gennady Shkliarevsky

    Moral dimension is a characteristic feature of most transformative developments that have occurred in the course of human history. Moral outrage has fuelled numerous upheavals, uprisings, and revolutions. Researchers have recognized the important role of moral outrage during periods of social and political change. However, they usually tend to explain it by social, political, or economic factors. They rarely trace this phenomenon to purely moral factors. This article argues that the primary source of moral outrage lies in the moral sphere – specifically, in the discrepancy between the widely recognized moral principles and the actual practice. The imperative of equality is arguably the most important and fundamental principle that underpins the existence of morality. The appeal of the imperative of equality transcends temporal and cultural boundaries. Yet despite this broad appeal, our social practice accepts, tolerates, and perpetuates inequality. This article calls this discrepancy the moral predicament. The article will analyse the factors that are involved in the making of the moral predicament. It will identify the source of the imperative of equality and will explain why this imperative has not been realized in practice. The article will also consider several relevant issues, such as the rise of consciousness and morality. Finally, the article will offer a perspective on how the problem of the moral predicament can be solved.