Review
BibTex RIS Cite

Amartya Sen’in Düşüncesinde ‘Zenginliği Yönetme’ Problemi

Year 2020, Volume: 9 Issue: 4, 2627 - 2637, 13.10.2020
https://doi.org/10.33206/mjss.713470

Abstract

Küresel ekonomiye ilişkin temel göstergelere bakıldığında yıllar itibariyle toplumların giderek daha fazla zenginleştiği görülür. Çeşitli raporlara göre de önümüzdeki yıllarda küresel milli gelirin çok daha fazla artacağı belirtilir. Öte yandan zenginleşen Batı toplumlarının bu süreci iyi yönetemediğine dair eleştiriler gün geçtikçe artmaktadır. Bu çerçevede çalışmanın amacı Nobel ödüllü iktisatçı Amartya Sen’in düşüncelerine başvurularak zenginleşme sürecinin doğru bir şekilde yönetilebilmesi için ne yapılması gerektiğinin vurgulanmasıdır. Bu doğrultuda Sen’in kapitalizmin sert çekirdeği olan rasyonel insan modeli eleştirisi kapsamında refah iktisadı, faydacı anlayış, yoksulluk ve kalkınma gibi iktisadi konuları etik temelli ele alış tarzı işlenmiştir. Ardından iktisadi literatüre kazandırdığı kapasite yaklaşımı ve özgürlükler gibi kavramlar ortaya koyulmuştur. Sen’in faydacı kuram ya da kapitalizm eleştirisi, yeni bir sistem üretme çabasından ziyade mevcut sistemin hatalarını giderme ve boşluklarını doldurma girişimidir. Yine de onun düşüncesinde insanın özne konumunun korunup sosyo-ekonomik politikaların merkezine yerleştirilmesi ve toplumsal barış, dayanışma ve işbirliğini destekleyen bir etik anlayışının ekonomi alanına kodlanması gibi özellikler sosyo-ekonomik gelişmenin sürdürülebilmesine zemin ve imkân hazırlaması açısından son derece önemlidir.

References

  • Alkan, Y. (2018). J. Rawls’ın iktisadi adalet teorisi. İstanbul: Hiper Yayıncılık.
  • Ashman, S. (2012). Economics and political economy today: ıntroduction to the symposium on Fine and Milonakis. Historical Materialism, 20(3), 3-8.
  • Atılgan, A. (1996). İslâm’ın ekonomik politikaları. İstanbul: Nesil Basım Yayın.
  • Bloomberg the Company. (2020). Bloomberg billionaires index (https://www.bloomberg.com/billionaires/). (E.T. 10.03.2020).
  • Bonar, J. (1926). The theory of moral sentiments by Adam Smith 1759. Philosophy, 1(3), 333-353.
  • Dowie, M. (1977). Pinto madness. Mother Jones, 2, 18-32.
  • Duran, B. (2017). Din ve kapitalizm. LAP Lambert Academic Publishing.
  • Evans, P. (2002). Collective capabilities, culture, and Amartya Sen’s Development as Freedom. Studies in comparative international development, 37, 54-60.
  • Frediani, A. A. (2007). Amartya Sen, the world bank, and the redress of urban poverty: a Brazilian case study. Journal of human development, 8(1), 133-152.
  • International Monetary Fund, (2020). world economic outlook reports (https://www.imf.org). (E.T. 15.03.2020).
  • Kiscusi, W. K. (2000). Corporate risk analysis: a reckless act?. Stanford Law Review, 52.
  • Oxfam, (2019). https://oxf.am/2FHO6EZ (E.T. 10.02.2020).
  • Pareto, V. (2014). Manual of political economy: a variorum translation and critical edition. UK: Oxford University Press.
  • Parr, S. F. (2003). The human development paradigm: operationalizing Sen's ideas on capabilities. Feminist economics, 9(2-3), 301-317.
  • Parsons, T. (1934). Some reflections on “the nature and significance of economics”. Quarterly journal of economics, 48(3), 511-545.
  • Pigou, A. C. (1932). The economic of welfare (Fourth Edition). London: Macmillan.
  • Rawls, J. (2017). Bir adalet teorisi (Çev. V. A. Coşar). Ankara: Phoenix Yayınevi.
  • Robeyns, I. (2003). Sen's capability approach and gender inequality: selectıng relevant capabilities. Feminist economics, 9(2-3), 61-92.
  • Sandel, M. J. (2018). Adalet: yapılması gereken doğru şey nedir? (6. Baskı). (Çev. M. Kocaoğlu). Ankara: Eksi Kitaplar.
  • Sen, A. (1977). Rational fools: a critique of the behavioral foundations of economic theory. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 6(4), 317-344.
  • Sen, A. (1979). Utilitarianism and welfarism. The Journal of Philosophy, 74, 463-489.
  • Sen, A. (1981). Poverty and famines: an essay on entitlement and deprivation. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
  • Sen, A. (1985). Commodities and capabilities. USA: Elsevier Science Publication.
  • Sen, A. (1990). On ethics and economics. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
  • Sen, A. (1991). Beneconfusion. In J. G. T. Meeks (Edt.), Thoughtful economic man: essays on rationality, moral rules and benevolence (pp. 12-16). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Sen, A. (1992). Inequality reexamined. USA: Harvard University Press.
  • Sen, A. (1993). Capability and well-being. In M. Nussbaum & A. Sen (Edt.). The quality of life (pp. 30-53). Oxford: Clarendon Press.
  • Sen, A. (1995). Rationality and social choice. The American Economic Review, 85(1), 1-24.
  • Sen, A. (1997). On economic inequality. USA: Oxford University Press.
  • Sen, A. (1999). Development as freedom. NY: Knopf Publishers.
  • Sen, A. & Williams, B. (1999b). Utilitarianism and beyond. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Sen, A. (2000). Development as freedom. New York: Anchor Books.
  • Sen, A. (2003). Etik ve ekonomi (Çev. A. Süha). İstanbul: Doğan Kitap.
  • Sen, A. (2013). The Comtemporary Relevance of Adam Smith. In C. J. Berry, M. P. Paganelli, C. Smith (Edt.). The Oxford hand book of Adam Smith (pp. 581-591). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Sıddıkî, M. N. (1976). İslâm ekonomisinin temelleri (Çev. B. Gürsan). İzmir: Akyay Kaynak Yayınları.
  • Smith, A. (1776). An inquiry into the nature and casuses of the welth of nations. London: W. Strahan and T. Cadell.
  • Smith, A. (1790). The theory of moral sentiments (6th Edition). London: A. Millar.
  • Sugden, R. (1993). Review: welfare, resources, and capabilities: a review of inequality reexamined by Amartya Sen. Journal of economic literature, 31(4), 1947-1962.
  • Stewart, F., Deneulin, S. (2002). Amartya Sen’s contribution to development thinking. Studies in comparative international development, 37, 61–70.
  • The World Bank, (2020). global economic prospects and growth reports (https://www.worldbank.org). (E.T. 15.03.2020).
  • Toboso, M. (2011). Rethinking disability in Amartya Sen’s approach: ICT and equality of opportunity. Ethics and information technology, 13, 107-118.
  • Turner, B. S. (2011). Religion and the modern society: citizenship, secularization and the state. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • UNDP. (2019). Global multidimensonal poverty index 2019: illuminating inequalities (http://hdr.undp.org/en/2019-MPI). (E.T. 10.03.2020).
  • Weber, M. (1950). The protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism (Third Impression). (Trans. T. Parsons). New York: Charles Scripner’s Son.
Year 2020, Volume: 9 Issue: 4, 2627 - 2637, 13.10.2020
https://doi.org/10.33206/mjss.713470

Abstract

References

  • Alkan, Y. (2018). J. Rawls’ın iktisadi adalet teorisi. İstanbul: Hiper Yayıncılık.
  • Ashman, S. (2012). Economics and political economy today: ıntroduction to the symposium on Fine and Milonakis. Historical Materialism, 20(3), 3-8.
  • Atılgan, A. (1996). İslâm’ın ekonomik politikaları. İstanbul: Nesil Basım Yayın.
  • Bloomberg the Company. (2020). Bloomberg billionaires index (https://www.bloomberg.com/billionaires/). (E.T. 10.03.2020).
  • Bonar, J. (1926). The theory of moral sentiments by Adam Smith 1759. Philosophy, 1(3), 333-353.
  • Dowie, M. (1977). Pinto madness. Mother Jones, 2, 18-32.
  • Duran, B. (2017). Din ve kapitalizm. LAP Lambert Academic Publishing.
  • Evans, P. (2002). Collective capabilities, culture, and Amartya Sen’s Development as Freedom. Studies in comparative international development, 37, 54-60.
  • Frediani, A. A. (2007). Amartya Sen, the world bank, and the redress of urban poverty: a Brazilian case study. Journal of human development, 8(1), 133-152.
  • International Monetary Fund, (2020). world economic outlook reports (https://www.imf.org). (E.T. 15.03.2020).
  • Kiscusi, W. K. (2000). Corporate risk analysis: a reckless act?. Stanford Law Review, 52.
  • Oxfam, (2019). https://oxf.am/2FHO6EZ (E.T. 10.02.2020).
  • Pareto, V. (2014). Manual of political economy: a variorum translation and critical edition. UK: Oxford University Press.
  • Parr, S. F. (2003). The human development paradigm: operationalizing Sen's ideas on capabilities. Feminist economics, 9(2-3), 301-317.
  • Parsons, T. (1934). Some reflections on “the nature and significance of economics”. Quarterly journal of economics, 48(3), 511-545.
  • Pigou, A. C. (1932). The economic of welfare (Fourth Edition). London: Macmillan.
  • Rawls, J. (2017). Bir adalet teorisi (Çev. V. A. Coşar). Ankara: Phoenix Yayınevi.
  • Robeyns, I. (2003). Sen's capability approach and gender inequality: selectıng relevant capabilities. Feminist economics, 9(2-3), 61-92.
  • Sandel, M. J. (2018). Adalet: yapılması gereken doğru şey nedir? (6. Baskı). (Çev. M. Kocaoğlu). Ankara: Eksi Kitaplar.
  • Sen, A. (1977). Rational fools: a critique of the behavioral foundations of economic theory. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 6(4), 317-344.
  • Sen, A. (1979). Utilitarianism and welfarism. The Journal of Philosophy, 74, 463-489.
  • Sen, A. (1981). Poverty and famines: an essay on entitlement and deprivation. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
  • Sen, A. (1985). Commodities and capabilities. USA: Elsevier Science Publication.
  • Sen, A. (1990). On ethics and economics. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
  • Sen, A. (1991). Beneconfusion. In J. G. T. Meeks (Edt.), Thoughtful economic man: essays on rationality, moral rules and benevolence (pp. 12-16). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Sen, A. (1992). Inequality reexamined. USA: Harvard University Press.
  • Sen, A. (1993). Capability and well-being. In M. Nussbaum & A. Sen (Edt.). The quality of life (pp. 30-53). Oxford: Clarendon Press.
  • Sen, A. (1995). Rationality and social choice. The American Economic Review, 85(1), 1-24.
  • Sen, A. (1997). On economic inequality. USA: Oxford University Press.
  • Sen, A. (1999). Development as freedom. NY: Knopf Publishers.
  • Sen, A. & Williams, B. (1999b). Utilitarianism and beyond. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Sen, A. (2000). Development as freedom. New York: Anchor Books.
  • Sen, A. (2003). Etik ve ekonomi (Çev. A. Süha). İstanbul: Doğan Kitap.
  • Sen, A. (2013). The Comtemporary Relevance of Adam Smith. In C. J. Berry, M. P. Paganelli, C. Smith (Edt.). The Oxford hand book of Adam Smith (pp. 581-591). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Sıddıkî, M. N. (1976). İslâm ekonomisinin temelleri (Çev. B. Gürsan). İzmir: Akyay Kaynak Yayınları.
  • Smith, A. (1776). An inquiry into the nature and casuses of the welth of nations. London: W. Strahan and T. Cadell.
  • Smith, A. (1790). The theory of moral sentiments (6th Edition). London: A. Millar.
  • Sugden, R. (1993). Review: welfare, resources, and capabilities: a review of inequality reexamined by Amartya Sen. Journal of economic literature, 31(4), 1947-1962.
  • Stewart, F., Deneulin, S. (2002). Amartya Sen’s contribution to development thinking. Studies in comparative international development, 37, 61–70.
  • The World Bank, (2020). global economic prospects and growth reports (https://www.worldbank.org). (E.T. 15.03.2020).
  • Toboso, M. (2011). Rethinking disability in Amartya Sen’s approach: ICT and equality of opportunity. Ethics and information technology, 13, 107-118.
  • Turner, B. S. (2011). Religion and the modern society: citizenship, secularization and the state. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • UNDP. (2019). Global multidimensonal poverty index 2019: illuminating inequalities (http://hdr.undp.org/en/2019-MPI). (E.T. 10.03.2020).
  • Weber, M. (1950). The protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism (Third Impression). (Trans. T. Parsons). New York: Charles Scripner’s Son.
There are 44 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Journal Section Review
Authors

Ahmet Yavuz Çamlı 0000-0002-0746-9755

Publication Date October 13, 2020
Submission Date April 2, 2020
Published in Issue Year 2020 Volume: 9 Issue: 4

Cite

APA Çamlı, A. Y. (2020). Amartya Sen’in Düşüncesinde ‘Zenginliği Yönetme’ Problemi. MANAS Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 9(4), 2627-2637. https://doi.org/10.33206/mjss.713470
AMA Çamlı AY. Amartya Sen’in Düşüncesinde ‘Zenginliği Yönetme’ Problemi. MJSS. October 2020;9(4):2627-2637. doi:10.33206/mjss.713470
Chicago Çamlı, Ahmet Yavuz. “Amartya Sen’in Düşüncesinde ‘Zenginliği Yönetme’ Problemi”. MANAS Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi 9, no. 4 (October 2020): 2627-37. https://doi.org/10.33206/mjss.713470.
EndNote Çamlı AY (October 1, 2020) Amartya Sen’in Düşüncesinde ‘Zenginliği Yönetme’ Problemi. MANAS Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi 9 4 2627–2637.
IEEE A. Y. Çamlı, “Amartya Sen’in Düşüncesinde ‘Zenginliği Yönetme’ Problemi”, MJSS, vol. 9, no. 4, pp. 2627–2637, 2020, doi: 10.33206/mjss.713470.
ISNAD Çamlı, Ahmet Yavuz. “Amartya Sen’in Düşüncesinde ‘Zenginliği Yönetme’ Problemi”. MANAS Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi 9/4 (October 2020), 2627-2637. https://doi.org/10.33206/mjss.713470.
JAMA Çamlı AY. Amartya Sen’in Düşüncesinde ‘Zenginliği Yönetme’ Problemi. MJSS. 2020;9:2627–2637.
MLA Çamlı, Ahmet Yavuz. “Amartya Sen’in Düşüncesinde ‘Zenginliği Yönetme’ Problemi”. MANAS Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, vol. 9, no. 4, 2020, pp. 2627-3, doi:10.33206/mjss.713470.
Vancouver Çamlı AY. Amartya Sen’in Düşüncesinde ‘Zenginliği Yönetme’ Problemi. MJSS. 2020;9(4):2627-3.

MANAS Journal of Social Studies