ChapterPDF Available

Editorial Foreward

On Abstract and Historical
Hypotheses and on Value
Judgments in Economic Sciences
Luigi Einaudi (1874–1961) was a leading liberal economist, economic historian
and political gure. This book provides the English-speaking world with a rst
critical edition of Einaudi’s – hitherto unpublished – rewriting of one of his most
unique and thoughtful essays.
The relevance of this essay is crucial from several perspectives: history and
methodology of economic thought, role of economics and its relation to other
disciplines and to social values, and role of economists in the public sphere, while
also encompassing the discourse on man and the economist as a “whole man”. The
critical edition of On Abstract and Historical Hypotheses and on Value Judgments
in Economic Sciences includes a comprehensive introduction and afterword. An
extensive reappraisal of this newly discovered essay will help to cast light on
Einaudi’s uniqueness and originality within and beyond the Italian tradition in
public nance, thereby also illuminating his attempt to provide an epistemologi-
cal account of his long-lasting enquiry into the causes of good and bad polities.
This book is of great interest to those who study economic theory and phi-
losophy, as well as history of economic thought, public economics and legal and
political philosophy.
Luigi Einaudi (1874–1961) was a leading liberal economist, journalist, economic
historian, one of the major representatives of the Italian tradition in public nance
and political gure: Governor of the Bank of Italy, Minister for the Budget and
President of the Italian Republic.
Paolo Silvestri is Research Fellow in Economics at the Department of Economics
and Statistics “Cognetti de Martiis”, University of Turin. He is also Habilitated
Associate Professor both in Philosophy of Law and Political Philosophy.
Review Copy Only - Not for Redistribution
Paolo Silvestri - University of Turin - 4/24/17
180 A Historical Political Economy of Capitalism
After metaphysics
Andrea Micocci
181 Comparisons in Economic Thought
Economic interdependency reconsidered
Stavros A. Drakopoulos
182 Four Central Theories of the Market Economy
Conceptions, evolution and applications
Farhad Rassekh
183 Ricardo and the History of Japanese Economic Thought
A selection of Ricardo studies in Japan during the interwar period
Edited by Susumu Takenaga
184 The Theory of the Firm
An overview of the economic mainstream
Paul Walker
185 On Abstract and Historical Hypotheses and on Value
Judgments in Economic Sciences
Critical Edition, with an Introduction and Afterword
by Paolo Silvestri
Luigi Einaudi
Edited by Paolo Silvestri
186 The Origins of Neoliberalism
Insights from economics and philosophy
Giandomenica Becchio and Giovanni Leghissa
187 The Political Economy of Latin American Independence
Edited by Alexandre Mendes Cunha and Carlos Eduardo Suprinyak
Routledge Studies in the History of Economics
For a full list of titles in this series, please visit
Review Copy Only - Not for Redistribution
Paolo Silvestri - University of Turin - 4/24/17
On Abstract and Historical
Hypotheses and on Value
Judgments in Economic
Critical Edition, with an Introduction
and Afterword by Paolo Silvestri
Luigi Einaudi
Edited by Paolo Silvestri
Review Copy Only - Not for Redistribution
Paolo Silvestri - University of Turin - 4/24/17
First published 2017
by Routledge
2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN
and by Routledge
711 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10017
Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa
© 2017 selection and editorial matter, Paolo Silvestri; individual chapters,
Luigi Einaudi
The right of Paolo Silvestri to be identied as the author of the editorial
material, and of Luigi Einaudi for his individual chapters, has been
asserted in accordance with sections 77 and 78 of the Copyright, Designs
and Patents Act 1988.
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or
utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now
known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in
any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing
from the publishers.
Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or
registered trademarks, and are used only for identication and explanation
without intent to infringe.
British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data
A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Names: Einaudi, Luigi, 1874-1961, author. | Silvestri, Paolo, 1974- editor.
Title: On abstract and historical hypotheses and on value-judgments in
economic sciences / Luigi Einaudi ; edited by Paolo Silvestri.
Description: Critical edition / with introduction and afterword by Paolo
Silvestri | Abingdon, Oxon ; New York, NY : Routledge, 2017. |
Includes bibliographical references.
Identiers: LCCN 2016017555 | ISBN 9780415517904 (hardback) |
ISBN 9781315637372 (ebook)
Subjects: LCSH: Economics. | Economics—History
Classication: LCC HB71 .E34 2017 | DDC 330.01—dc23
LC record available at
ISBN: 978-0-415-51790-4 (hbk)
ISBN: 978-1-315-45793-2 (ebk)
Typeset in Times New Roman
by Apex CoVantage, LLC
Review Copy Only - Not for Redistribution
Paolo Silvestri - University of Turin - 4/24/17
Editorial foreword ix
Preface xxiv
Acknowledgements xxxiii
Abbreviations xxxv
Introduction: The defense of economic science and the
issue of value judgments 1
Luigi Einaudi: On abstract and historical hypotheses
and on value judgments in economic sciences 35
I Abstract hypotheses and historical hypotheses 37
II On some abstract hypotheses concerning the state and on
their historical value 49
III On value judgments in economic sciences 66
Bibliographical note 92
Afterword: Freedom and taxation between good and bad
polity and the economist-whole-man 94
Bibliography 137
Index 153
Review Copy Only - Not for Redistribution
Paolo Silvestri - University of Turin - 4/24/17
Review Copy Only - Not for Redistribution
Paolo Silvestri - University of Turin - 4/24/17
Editorial foreword ix
1 Towards the second edition: On Einaudi’s intention
and the chronology of the rewriting x
2 Conjectures on the reasons for the failure to publish
the second version xiv
3   The abstract and the summary of the rst edition: The 
itinerary of Einaudi’s arguments xv
4 The major structural changes xviii
5 Notes on the rewriting process: The debate with his
correspondents xix
6 Editorial decisions xxi
Preface xxiv
1 Relevance and uniqueness of Einaudi’s essay xxiv
2 Structure of this critical edition xxix
Acknowledgements xxxiii
Abbreviations xxxv
Introduction: The defense of economic science and the issue
of value judgments 1
1 The economist in the public sphere: Between governors,
governed and lay public 1
1.1 The most remote antecedent of the present essay 3
2 The methodological position of the 1930s: In defense
of economic science 5
2.1 The re-reading of Robbins: Instrumental reasoning
and signicance of economic science  7
3 The debate with Fasiani (1938–1943): From Myths and
paradoxes of justice in taxation to the present essay 10
3.1 An overview: The demarcation issue 10
3.2 Counsels and theorems: Normative and theoretical
language and their reciprocal translatability 14
Detailed contents
Review Copy Only - Not for Redistribution
Paolo Silvestri - University of Turin - 4/24/17
viii Detailed contents
3.3 Science and history and the (alleged) detachment of the
scholar 18
3.4 Abstract versus historical schemata of state 21
4 The turning point of the 1940s: The issue of value
judgments 22
4.1 Historicity of economics and the “passionate
economist” 22
4.2 The nearest antecedent of the present essay 24
4.3 The debate with Croce: Liberism and liberalism,
economics and philosophy 26
Luigi Einaudi: On abstract and historical hypotheses
and on value judgments in economic sciences 35
I Abstract hypotheses and historical hypotheses 37
II On some abstract hypotheses concerning the state
and on their historical value 49
III On value judgments in economic sciences 66
Bibliographical note 92
Afterword: Freedom and taxation between good and bad
polity and the economist-whole-man 94
1 The schemata of the state and the search for a liberal good
polity 94
1.1   Engaging with the Italian tradition in public nance: 
Within and beyond the economic approach 98
1.2 Hypotheses and schema: Theory, interpretation
and communication of historical reality 105
1.3 The anthropological background: The individual
and the collective 111
2 Excursus 116
3  Value judgments, economics, philosophy  117
3.1 The issue of value judgments 119
3.2 Economics, philosophy and the whole man 123
Bibliography 137
Index 153
Review Copy Only - Not for Redistribution
Paolo Silvestri - University of Turin - 4/24/17
The rst edition of Ipotesi astratte ed ipotesi storiche e dei giudizi di valore nelle
scienze economiche (On Abstract and Historical Hypotheses and on Value Judg-
ments in Economic Sciences) was originally presented as a note to the “Royal
Academy of Sciences of Turin”, in the meeting held on 17 February 1943 and
published in the same year (E. 1942–1943) (henceforth the “rst edition”).
The previously unpublished text presented here is what had been planned – at
least in Einaudi’s original intentions – as the second and profoundly modied
edition of the same text. Depending on the context and/or when it is not neces-
sary to distinguish between the two versions, the title On Abstract and Historical
Hypotheses and on Value Judgments in Economic Sciences will be abbreviated as
“the present essay”.
I discovered the existence of this second unpublished version in the Archive
of the Fondazione Luigi Einaudi of Turin as I was trying to clarify to myself the
meaning that should be ascribed to the rst edition of the essay (the interpretation
of which I have always considered somewhat difcult) and, more generally, to the
overall problem of the tormented and wavering nature of Einaudi’s methodologi-
cal reection in the previous years.
When I encountered this text, I immediately realized I had come upon a work
of exceedingly great importance. I strongly hope that the present critical edition
will succeed in bringing to light a number of details that will help to clarify the
reasons underlying this assessment.
The aim of this Editorial Foreword, however, is to provide the reader with some
information of an archival, philological and editorial nature concerning this sec-
ond version (those who wish to skip this foreword can proceed directly to the
Preface). In particular, I intend to: 1) reconstruct briey the chronology of the
rewriting process of the rst edition and give evidence on Einaudi’s intention to
republish it in a second expanded and modied edition, 2) make a few conjectures
on the reasons why it never reached the stage of publication, 3) show the Abstract
and Summary of the rst edition in order to provide the reader with a means of
orientation that will assist him or her in following the main path in the develop-
ment of Einaudi’s arguments, 4) highlight the major structural changes to the rst
edition, 5) provide the reader with introductory notes on the rewriting process and
the debate between Einaudi and his interlocutors that led to the present essay, and
Editorial foreword
Review Copy Only - Not for Redistribution
Paolo Silvestri - University of Turin - 4/24/17
x Editorial foreword
6) give an explicit account of the editorial decisions adopted in the publication of
this second version.
1 Towards the second edition: On Einaudi’s intention
and the chronology of the rewriting
While the rst edition of this essay arose in the wake of the debate between Ein-
audi and his pupil Fasiani, its rewriting was not only spurred by Einaudi’s second
thoughts on this debate and on the methodological reection of the 1930s and the
beginning of the 1940s, but it was also the result of an intense epistolary debate
between Einaudi and several scholars and/or colleagues or pupils of his. Among
them were Gioele Solari, Alessandro Passerin d’Entrèves, Giuseppe Bruguier
Pacini and Antonio Giolitti.
That Einaudi clearly intended to publish a second edition emerges from the
very process of rewriting the original essay as well as from the exchange of
letters with his correspondents and from numerous other unequivocal types of
evidence that I have discovered on various occasions subsequent to the nding
of the second version. By virtue of the dates indicated in the aforementioned
correspondence, the whole rewriting process can, in all likelihood, be ascribed
to a period between July 1943 and 22 September of the same year. The latter
cutoff date marks the moment Einaudi found out that the Nazi-Fascists were
lying in wait for him near the University of Turin (Einaudi had been appointed
Chancellor in August), whereupon he was compelled to prepare his ight to exile
in Switzerland.
In July 1943, at the height of the discussion with Fasiani, and prompted – in
primis – by comments and doubts from Solari concerning the rst edition (Lett.:
Solari to E., June 27, 1943), Einaudi prepared several typewritten pages addressed
to his four correspondents in hopes of reviving the debate and receiving additional
critical appraisals preparatory to a rewriting of the essay (for further discussion on
the content of these pages, the debate with his correspondents and the rewriting
process, see the text that follows).
The dating of the period in which Einaudi completed the denitive version
of what he intended to be the second edition is far less certain. It is likely to
have been sometime between August and September 22 of 1943. In a letter to
d’Entrèves on 21 July, Einaudi explicitly states that he was ‘intending to rework
that note [i.e. the rst edition presented to the Academy of Sciences] and turn it
into something in its own right’ (Lett.: E. to d’Entrèves, July 21, 1943). It seems
from the letter that he was in somewhat of a hurry to complete it, and he urged
d’Entrèves to give him critical comments and suggestions within August 7–8
(furthermore, it would seem from the contents of a letter by Giolitti that Ein-
audi had asked Giolitti himself to send some personal observations on the note
within August 5 (Lett.: Giolitti to E., August 8, 1943)). Thus one may surmise
that Einaudi wished to receive the comments before his departure for Gressoney
(in the Vale of Aosta), where he was perhaps hoping to have a chance to nish
his new version during a moment of relative peace and quiet. Einaudi may also
Review Copy Only - Not for Redistribution
Paolo Silvestri - University of Turin - 4/24/17
Editorial foreword xi
have anticipated the imminent collapse of the fascist regime, which effectively
took place on 25 July, and he probably assumed that September would be a very
busy month. But he had no conception, at the time, of the degeneration of events
that would follow as a result of the Nazi-Fascist invasion, and even less did he
imagine his ensuing ight to Switzerland.
However, in the absence of further evidence, it cannot be ruled out with any
certainty that the process of rewriting may actually have taken place after his
return from exile, or even up to the day of his death. Naturally, the hypothesis of
death as a sufcient reason to explain the failure to republish and/or the incom-
pleteness of the editorial project that I discovered later (see below) would make
all the questions raised in the rest of this foreword either superuous or meaning-
less, as they are questions based on the hypothesis that the rewriting occurred
between August and Einaudi’s ight into exile.
Despite the fact that the second version contains modications introduced
directly in an offprint of the rst edition and that the modied offprint was in all
probability a nal draft ready to be sent to the printer (as I will also show) not
all doubts can be fully dispelled, because there are some annotations written in
pencil on the second version that were made by an as yet unidentied hand: these
annotations are not limited merely to suggesting formal corrections, but they also
contain very short comments on the readability of the content or on its persuasive
strength or weakness. Thus not only is there no absolute certainty about the date
of the rewriting process, but it is equally difcult to ascertain when these annota-
tions in pencil were made and whether Einaudi really intended to take them into
Furthermore, after the discovery of the second version, as I gradually extended
my research in the Einaudi Archive, I little by little reached the conviction of the
existence of a veritable editorial plan for a collection of Einaudian essays that was
to include the reprinting of this second version. This collection, as I have only
recently been able to ascertain and conrm, was intended to be one of the volumes
of the Opere complete di Luigi Einaudi [Complete Works of Luigi Einaudi], the
publication of which, under the editorship of the “Giulio Einaudi Editore” press
run by his son, had begun in 1941 but was never completed. It emerges from the
exchange of correspondence and jottings between father and son that Einaudi
developed the idea of this work in 1942 (Lett.: E. to Giulio Einaudi, September 27,
1942), and a rst draft of the index was drawn up in March 1943. Einaudi men-
tioned in those letters to his son that he intended to start work on this undertaking
in May, i.e. once he returned to his home in San Giacomo (Dogliani, Cuneo),
where he had the offprints of the articles he hoped to reformulate and include in
the collection (Lett.: E. to Giulio Einaudi, March 1943). Moreover, Giulio himself,
in a message he transmitted to his father via Giolitti – who at the time was working
at the Giulio Einaudi Editore press – suggested the idea of republishing the revised
and more extended version of the present essay (Lett.: Giolitti to E., July 10, 1943).
This notwithstanding, the denitive index of the volume drawn up by Einaudi
has not yet been found, but I have been able to partially reconstruct it on the basis
of various investigations. The evidence that has led me to formulate and then
Review Copy Only - Not for Redistribution
Paolo Silvestri - University of Turin - 4/24/17
xii Editorial foreword
conrm the existence of the project for a volume of the Complete Works and the
accompanying index is as follows:
a) The insertion of a Roman numeral on the frontispiece of the offprint of each
article intended to be included in the collection as an indication of its position
within the collection itself;
b) The Bibliographical Note in which Einaudi intended to put the last two (cut
out) pages of the present essay (see also the following text). The editorial
strategy of the insertion of the Bibliographical Note had already been used
by Einaudi at the end of the rst volume of his Complete Works (E. 1941e) to
indicate the debates, the critical observations and the various correspondents
involved and, more generally, the reasons that had spurred him to introduce
changes in the subsequent editions of one or more of the essays republished
in that collection. Unfortunately, there is no extant version of those comments
that Einaudi planned to insert in the Bibliographical Note. It was designed to
provide an explanation with regard to the variations introduced in his writ-
ings, but the volume of which the present essay was intended to form part of
was not completed (see the following text). All I have found is a small sheet
of paper where Einaudi jotted down and summarised in no more than a few
lines the comments put forward by his correspondents;
c) A reference added in the text of the present essay, with the wording ‘cf. supra,
essay . . .’ (note 8, p. 91), clearly indicates – through use of the term “supra”
that this is a reference to an essay which, in the collection, was to precede this
second edition. The part left blank refers, as can be seen from the context, to
another review essay by Einaudi, ‘Dell’uomo, ne o mezzo, e dei beni d’ozio’
[‘On man, an end or a means, and on leisure goods’] (E. 1942c), which had
formed the object of a debate with Solari. Of this essay, as well, I later dis-
covered another version, profoundly revised, with a view to a second edition.
Here, too, the changes were written directly on the offprint. Unfortunately, it
appears that the pages Einaudi intended to add (as can be inferred from the
insertion symbols on the offprint itself) have gone missing (or, at least, have
not yet been found). However, the fact that this is the only added note with a
reference left blank could also be interpreted as a mere oversight, or as a sign
that Einaudi did not succeed in completing the rewriting of this other essay
(due to his ight into exile or for other unknown reasons);
d) Another note added in the present essay (note 1, p. 48), which referred back
to another fundamental essay by Einaudi: ‘Le premesse del ragionamento eco-
nomico e la realtà storica’ [The Premises of Economic Reasoning and Histori-
cal Reality] (E. 1940c). I have since then discovered that this essay had likewise
been extensively reworked, with a number of pages having been added;
e) The latter two discoveries gave me a further impetus in the search for other
possible essays reworked by Einaudi with a view to their reprinting in the
collection. But, in the absence of the index of the contents of such a col-
lection, I have had no alternative than to fumble, as it were, in the dark (of
the Archive), guided only by my knowledge of Einaudi and by the attempt
Review Copy Only - Not for Redistribution
Paolo Silvestri - University of Turin - 4/24/17
Editorial foreword xiii
to nd offprints with a Roman numeral on the frontispiece, corrections and
modications that point to editorial intervention and/or with the addition of
notes cross-referencing other articles of the collection. At the current stage of
my research, the index I have been able to reconstruct is the following (the
articles I have not yet found are signalled by question marks):
I Le confessioni di un economista [The Confessions of an Economist]
(E. 1917)
II [?]
III Il peccato originale e la teoria della classe eletta in Federico Le Play
[Original Sin and the Theory of the Elect Class in Frédéric Le Play]
(E. 1936a)
IV Tema per gli storici dell’economia. Dell’anacoretismo economico
[Theme for Historians of Economics. On Economic Anachoritism]
(E. 1937)
V Le premesse del ragionamento economico e la realtà storica [The
Premises of Economic Reasoning and Historical Reality] (E. 1940c)
VI Ancora sulle premesse del ragionamento economico [More on the
Premises of Economic Reasoning] (E. 1941a)
VII Intorno al contenuto dei concetti di liberismo, comunismo, intervent-
ismo e simili [Remarks on the Content of the Concepts of Free Trade,
Communism, Interventionism and Similar Matters] (E. 1941b)
VIII Economia di concorrenza e capitalismo storico [Economy of Competi-
tion and Historical Capitalism] (E. 1942b)
IX Dell’uomo ne o mezzo, e dei beni d’ozio [On Man as End or Means,
and on Leisure Goods] (E. 1942c)
X [?]
XI [?]
XII [?]
XIII Ipotesi astratte e ipotesi storiche e dei giudizi di valore nelle scienze
economiche [On Abstract and Historical Hypotheses and on Value
Judgments in Economic Sciences] (E. 1942–43)
What we do know, however, with a fair degree of certainty, as testied also by
the exchange of correspondence with his son Giulio and the publishing house,
is that right up to his death, Einaudi continued to work on the publication of his
Complete Works and on the revision of the editorial plan pertaining to the volumes
the Complete Works was to contain. The last draft that has come down to us with
regard to this editorial plan dates from 1956. This draft does indeed mention the
publication of roughly ‘3–5 volumes’ of ‘selected essays’, one of which is almost
certainly the earlier cited collection (Archivio Luigi Einaudi, busta 3, biograa,
Giulio Einaudi Editore, 1956).
In any case, however, there remains open the problem of the meaning to be
attributed to Einaudi’s epistemological reection after his return from exile.
For example, if the nal draft of the present essay was not drawn up during
Review Copy Only - Not for Redistribution
Paolo Silvestri - University of Turin - 4/24/17
xiv Editorial foreword
August–September 1943 but at a later stage, then one might conjecture that in the
present essay, Einaudi could have been spurred by reading Fasiani’s further essays
published some years later or posthumously (Fasiani 1949 [2007], 1951). In these
essays Fasiani resumed the debate with his master and offered a response – albeit
with only a few additions complementing the earlier debate to the rst edition
by Einaudi and stated his intention of addressing this text in greater depth and in a
separate work, it being ‘too complex and too far-reaching’ (Fasiani 1951: 8). In the
end, however, death prevented him from doing so. If, on the other hand, Einaudi
rewrote the essay at an advanced age or not long before his own death, this would
change the meaning to be attributed to his subsequent but much shorter and spo-
radic reections and/or methodological reections (among them E. 1950c, 1962).
2 Conjectures on the reasons for the failure to publish
the second version
Since it is likely that the question of the ight into exile interrupted the repub-
lication of this essay (in this connection, other unpublished essays by Einaudi
have been found in the past, likewise written before his exile but not published)
(see, for example, E. 1994) one may wonder why Einaudi did not proceed with
republication upon his return to Italy. In this regard, I can only put forward a few
conjectures, some of which may, of course, be mutually substantiating.
a) The death of Fasiani, which occurred in 1950: since the debate with Fasiani
occupied the central portion of the essay, Einaudi may have felt that it would be
improper to polemicise with a person who had passed away, who, among other
things, was not only a pupil but also a distant relative of his. In fact, it was Ein-
audi who undertook to write his obituary (E. 1950b). To my knowledge, these
were his last words on Fasiani. However, this conjecture does not appear to be
decisive, especially since in the rewriting of the rst edition, Einaudi had gradu-
ally attenuated the dispute, presenting it as an interpretation he himself had put
upon Fasiani’s thought; indeed, Fasiani went so far as to confess to him that he
felt honoured to have been the object of such great attention and comments by
his master.
b) Loss of the material: the offprint with the corrections and the additional type-
written pages had perhaps gone missing and/or the variations introduced in
other essays had been mislaid (similarly to the aforementioned situation in
par. 1, point c); all of these were intended to be included in the collection, and
their loss may have prevented the republication of the entire volume.
c) Lack of time: upon his return to Italy, in December 1944, Einaudi had immedi-
ately taken on extremely challenging and time-consuming institutional com-
mitments: Governor of the Bank of Italy (1945–47), Member of the National
Consulta followed by Member of the Constituent Assembly (1945–47), Dep-
uty President of the Council of Ministers and Budget Minister (1947), Presi-
dent of the Republic (1948–1955). Although after this period of public ofce
Einaudi resumed intensive work on the publication of his Complete Works,
Review Copy Only - Not for Redistribution
Paolo Silvestri - University of Turin - 4/24/17
Editorial foreword xv
one may hypothesise that he did not succeed in bringing to completion before
his death (1961) both the introduction and the comments on the Bibliographi-
cal Note that were designed to provide the nishing touches for the volume
in which the present essay was to be contained.
d) Financial difculties of the Giulio Einaudi Press: if the present essay was
indeed to become part of a collection of essays destined to be included in the
edition of the Complete Works of Einaudi, it is worth repeating that no such
edition was ever accomplished after his death. Perphaps that was partly on
account of the nancial difculties affecting his son’s publishing house.
3   The abstract and the summary of the rst edition: 
The itinerary of Einaudi’s arguments
It may be helpful for the reader to take a look at the Abstract and Summary of the
rst edition. However, given the considerable changes/modications made in the
present essay, it is well to note immediately that these outlines are of use simply
as a means to follow the developmental path of Einaudi’s arguments.
The previous Abstract stated the following:
The author studies the differences between abstract hypotheses and uniform-
ities and empirical-historical uniformities in the eld of economic science,
distinguishing those that are valid sub specie aeternitatis but within the lim-
its of the premises that have been established, from those which cannot be
extended, except with great caution, beyond the time and place considered.
Do the schemata of the different types of state proposed by economists for
the study of nancial phenomena belong to the category of abstract or his-
torical tools of investigation? Logical incoherence of the concept of a state
which, in pursuit of its own ends, focuses only on the individual or only
the collective community. And nally, on the economist’s decision to refrain
from value judgments, which is legitimate if motivated by the scientic divi-
sion of labor, but illogical in the perspective of the more general quest for
The previous Summary of the sections was structured in the manner outlined
1 Abstract uniformities and historical uniformities. The method of successive
approximations. Use of experiments is a hurdle in social science. Abstract
uniformities are true sub specie aeternitatis.
2 Relations between abstract models and concrete reality. Economists – almost
to a man – want to have their say in everyday disputes.
3 Close links between theorems and counsels. Difference between positing
economic problems in the general equilibrium versus partial equilibrium
framework. Theoretical identity between the problem of rst approximation
solved by Walras and Pareto in the general equilibrium framework and the
Review Copy Only - Not for Redistribution
Paolo Silvestri - University of Turin - 4/24/17
xvi Editorial foreword
concrete problem of the price of wheat of a given quality at a given moment
solved by the brokers of a great cereal market.
4 The solution that would be obtained by calculation, impossible to achieve due
to lack of genuine data and the difculty of tting the data into equations, is
replaced with the solution obtained intuitively by the operators.
5 The old economists, even the greatest among them, such as Cantillon and
Ricardo, and not infrequently the recent theorists as well, such as Gossen
and Walras, accompany abstract rules with counsels and projects. Monetary
truths have almost always arisen from concrete counsels. The economist
sometimes “discovers” the solutions to problems, or at other times translates
the solutions already found by practitioners into hypothetical language.
6 Abstract laws fertile if capable of explaining concrete reality. Empirical laws
valid to explain links that existed in a given place and in a given time interval.
Value of empirical laws.
7 On the coincidence between abstract laws and concrete uniformities. On the
so-called failure of economic science and on verication of its theorems in
the case of war.
8 Tools of theoretical investigation and empirical testing of theoretical theo-
rems. Theoretical-historical tools. Unproductiveness of the latter. Their ina-
bility to explain historical events.
9 De Viti’s schemata of the monopolistic and cooperative state in public
nance. His caution in the use of schemata.
10 On Fasiani’s schemata applied to the study of the effects of taxes. Note on
the necessary nature of the connection between general taxation dened in a
given manner and the hypothesis of the monopolistic state.
11 On the denition of the “monopolistic” type of state and on the reasonableness of
the hypothesis that illusions, in the form of a system, are well suited to it, whereas
they may be absent in the other two types, the cooperative and modern state.
12 The correlation between scal illusions and monopolistic state is typical of
the subtype of monopolistic state in which the dominant class, adopting a
non-logical mode of behavior, exploits the dominated in such a manner as to
prepare and bring about its own ruin. Need for careful revision of historical
judgments on the nances of the states in the ancient regimes.
13 Analysis of the concepts of the cooperative and modern state.
14 If the dominators and the dominated are one and the same, the distinction
between the cooperative and the modern state is an absurdity. Within the state
there exist no individual citizens as distinct from the group, and the group
does not exist as an entity in its own right distinct from the citizens.
15 The state can pursue ends that are typical of individuals singly considered; but
such an approach amounts to a technical device to achieve ends that individuals
could achieve by themselves or in free associations, even without the action of
the state. The example of the colonies: individual aims can also be pursued by
means of private companies; the aims of the state are those of the motherland.
Review Copy Only - Not for Redistribution
Paolo Silvestri - University of Turin - 4/24/17
Editorial foreword xvii
16 In the modern state power cannot be exercised with exclusive concern for the
interests of the public group considered as a unit. If this were the case, we
would not be dealing with a “modern” state but rather with the deication of
the state above the individual. – Lack of consistency of the concept of dual-
ism between the individual and the state, and of a state that transcends the
individual, being placed outside of and above individuals.
17 The real contrast is the dialectical opposition between state and non-state, i.e.
between two entities that have always coexisted and which continue to exist
side by side. This is one of the aspects of the deep-rooted contrast between
the forces of good and the forces of evil.
18 The economist’s abstention from passing value judgments, which is legiti-
mate for reasons of the division of labor, cannot be sustained as a means of
moving towards more general knowledge of truth. – The will of the state is
the same as that of the scientist. – The alternative offered by Demosthenes:
war against Philip of Macedonia or festivities and entertainment. Difference
between the chemist and the economist.
19 The economist’s attitude of indifference towards the reasons underlying
choices is rooted in the study of price in the case of free competition. – The
study of cases of monopoly, limited competition and such makes it crucial
to go beyond the choice, and to seek to uncover the choices lying behind it,
in order to gain a better understanding of the choice actually made and its
manner of implementation. – Even the automatism of the hypothesis of full
competition is in itself an artice.
20 The convention according to which the pure economist, the applied econo-
mist, the politician, the scholar of law, etc. study different aspects of reality – a
convention necessary for reasons pertaining to the scientic division of labor – is
sometimes impossible to respect.
21 The right to insurrection, and the right to excommunicate, with regard to the
limits on scientic investigation. – Study of the ruling class does not exclude
study of the “elect class”.
22 Schemata and reality. – Once the reality of situations changes, the schemata
likewise change.
23 The proposition taken as a starting point by politicians concerning the exemp-
tion of a social minimum of existence is not a nal proposition.
24 The appeal for a route leading from an ill-informed Pope to a better informed
25 The proposition taken as a starting point by the legislator is subject to judg-
ment based on the ends pursued by human society.
26 Can economists decline all obligation to formulate value judgments?
27 There exist no articial limits on scientic investigation. The ends and ideals
of life play a crucial role in shaping men’s decisions. It is impossible to study
choices while pretending to be unaware of the ends from which they sprang.
(E. 1942–1943).
Review Copy Only - Not for Redistribution
Paolo Silvestri - University of Turin - 4/24/17
xviii Editorial foreword
4 The major structural changes
The changes Einaudi introduced are so profound and so far-reaching that they call
for preliminary considerations both on form and content.
Einaudi struck out both the Abstract and the Summary, together with the origi-
nal numbering of the sections in the text to which the Summary made reference.
Thus the structure underwent a change, reducing it to the three parts of the present
I Abstract hypotheses and historical hypotheses
II On some abstract hypotheses concerning the state and on their historical value
III On value judgments in economic sciences
The reasons underlying these modications do not appear to be a response
merely to editorial and stylistic requirements designed to rectify such aspects
as the non-uniform nature of the section titles (some too long or too short), or
because Einaudi did not usually insert abstracts and summaries in his collections
of essays.
Rather, issues regarding content also prompted the elimination of the Sum-
mary. To gain an idea of the extent of the changes made by Einaudi, sufce it
to note that quite apart from the many formal language and punctuation cor-
rections, and in addition to the fairly substantial handwritten insertions – not
to mention the various parts of the text that are crossed out – Einaudi ended up
also adding a total of 24 typewritten pages to the original 68 pages of the origi-
nal offprint of the rst edition. This resulted in a nal text that had undergone
profound change.
In this regard, the following observations should be borne in mind. The most
extensive modications and the greater part of the newly inserted pages concern
the second and the third part, thus the old sections from nine onwards. In par-
ticular, sections 9, 10 and 11 have been almost entirely eliminated, rewritten and
conated into a single section, not only in order to eliminate the lengthy footnote –
several pages long – referring to the debate with Fasiani, as the note was indeed
certainly far too long and disproportionate in comparison to the main body of the
text. It was deleted also because, one may surmise, Einaudi felt the need to dis-
sociate himself from that discussion and the misunderstandings which had ensued
and opted instead to add a note (note 1, p. 65) stating that this was “simply”
his own interpretation of Fasiani’s thought. Moreover, even if one disregards the
nonetheless fairly long handwritten modications, it can still be seen that many of
the typewritten pages addressed the conclusions of sections 17, 22 and 23, not to
mention the conclusions of the essay: of the old last section 27, Einaudi decided
to retain the last two pages, shifting them, however, to a Bibliographical Note,
and to completely rewrite the conclusions, with the addition of many pages and
new sections, thus the last ve sections (which, in the present essay, I have left
without numbering).
Review Copy Only - Not for Redistribution
Paolo Silvestri - University of Turin - 4/24/17
Editorial foreword xix
5 Notes on the rewriting process: The debate
with his correspondents
The rewriting process was mainly structured into three steps: it was spurred by
some comments on the rst edition made by Einaudi’s correspondents; Einaudi
then wrote several sheets, with his second thoughts and doubts, which were sent
to his correspondents in order to receive further comments; after which he wrote
the nal draft of the present essay.
The actors in the epistolary debate were Gioele Solari, a philosopher of law and
a friend and colleague of Einaudi’s; Alessandro Passerin d’Entrèves, a historian,
political and legal philosopher a pupil of both Solari and Einaudi; Giuseppe
Bruguier Pacini, interested in history and epistemology of economics; and Anto-
nio Giolitti, at that time working with the publishing house Giulio Einaudi, which
was directed by Einaudi’s son.1 Additionally, both Bruguier Pacini and Passerin
d’Entrèves followed, commented on and reviewed some of Einaudi’s previous
epistemological reections, among which was his re-reading of Robbins.
To rewrite the rst edition, Einaudi prepared different sets of sheets that were
transmitted so the recipients would have the opportunity of enhancing the debate
and/or taking further criticisms into consideration.
The rst set of pages, numbered and amounting to a total of 19, are divided
into two sections entitled Chiarimenti offerti al losofo [Clarications Offered to 
the Philosopher] (pp. 1–9) and Dubbi posti all’economista [Doubts Voiced to the
Economist] (pp. 10–19). They were sent without any particular differentiation to
all four of the correspondents; however, it would appear that Solari also received
another seven pages in response to a discussion already in progress between the
two scholars. These additional pages were likewise divided into two sections: Beni
d’ozio, cioè antieconomici [Leisure goods, i.e. antieconomic goods] (pp. 1–4)
(destined for the revised version of a separate essay) and Individuo, società, stato
[Individual, Society, State] (pp. 5–7).
Einaudi intended the thoughts embodied in these pages addressed to his cor-
respondents to constitute, with few additional modications, the core of the vari-
ations on the rst edition, which he hoped to republish as the second edition. In
particular, the pages Individual, Society, State (henceforth ISS) were rewritten
and used to integrate and modify the nal section (ex § 17) of the second part of
the present essay (II. On Some Abstract Hypotheses Concerning the State and on
Their Historical Value), while the pages Clarications Offered to the Philosopher
(henceforth COP) and Doubts Voiced to the Economist (henceforth DVE) were
mainly destined to integrate the conclusions of the third part (III. On Value Judg-
ments in Economic Sciences), in particular the rst three of the last ve sections
following ex § 27 (as noted, its last two pages were cut out and destined to the
Bibliographical Note).
In contrast, the last two sections of the present essay do not gure among the
pages sent to his correspondents; rather, they seem to embody a reection written
independently by Einaudi to provide the whole of his essay with a tting conclusion.
Review Copy Only - Not for Redistribution
Paolo Silvestri - University of Turin - 4/24/17
xx Editorial foreword
I will restrict myself here to mentioning mainly the comments on the rst edi-
tion that would appear to have played a signicant role in leading Einaudi to write
these pages, or to have second thoughts on certain issues and/or those that can
shed some light, at least from a general perspective, on the reasons underlying the
changes he introduced in the rewriting process.2
Some of the most signicant epistemological objections came from Bruguier
Pacini, who pointed out to Einaudi that the rst 11 sections of the rst edition
displayed an ‘uncertainty in the terminology concerning the use of “abstract”,
“concrete”, “empirical”, “historical” ’, but also in the use of words such as “uni-
formity” and “law”, “hypothesis” and “schema”. (Lett.: Bruguier Pacini to E.,
August 2, 1943). Einaudi replaced the word “uniformity” with “law” and “con-
crete” with “empirical”, although in some other cases, he did the opposite, and it
may well have been Bruguier Pacini who prompted Einaudi to insert a note (note 4,
p. 48) designed to distinguish “hypothesis” from “schema”.
In effect, the uncertainties noticed by Bruguier Pacini betray one of the main
difculties that had led Einaudi to write and rewrite this essay, especially its second
part: what is the epistemological nature of Fasiani’s types of state? What distin-
guishes them from the types of state used by De Viti De Marco and, above all, from
the “historical schemas” of good/bad polities established by Einaudi himself in his
Myths and Paradoxes of Justice in Taxation (henceforth MPJT) and here further
developed in terms of the dialectical opposition between “state” and “non-state”?
Among the correspondents involved in this debate, Solari was probably the one
who gave a decisive thrust in prompting Einaudi to rethink some of the issues
raised in the rst edition. In this regard, three passages from a letter sent to Ein-
audi (after the publication of the rst edition) are particularly signicant.
In the rst, Solari, paraphrasing Einaudi’s reference to the ‘Emperor’s advo-
cate’ (p. 78), grasps one of the main concerns that had induced Einaudi to com-
pose the rst edition:
I look very favorably on your criticism of the “Emperor’s economists” who
conceal their true being behind the screen of the fait accompli, elevating it
to the status of a dogma of economic science. It saddens me to nd Fasiani
among these men, but the latter embodies a deplorable and immoral tendency
of economic studies in the present period. And you are quite right to have
unmasked them by setting your liberalism openly in opposition to them and
establishing it openly as the foundation of your scientic activity.
(Lett.: Solari to E., June 27, 1943)
The second passage occurs where Solari urges Einaudi to clarify his use of
the concepts of individual, society, collectivity and state: what concerned Solari
was that the terms “state” and “elite” as used by Einaudi could reintroduce –
contrary to Einaudi’s intentions a concept of an ‘ethical state’ (Lett.: Solari to
E., June 27, 1943). In this regard, Einaudi later answered in the ISS pages, sub-
sequently reworked and included at the end of the last section (ex § 17) of the
second part of the present essay.
Review Copy Only - Not for Redistribution
Paolo Silvestri - University of Turin - 4/24/17
Editorial foreword xxi
The third comment – preceded by Solari’s favourable response to Einaudi’s
long review essay on Röpke (E. 1942b), a ‘philosopher economist’, who, in
Solari’s view, reawakened Einaudi’s interest in philosophy – seems fundamental.
In fact, Einaudi went so far as to rewrite it in an impersonal manner (or cutting
some sentences that contain an explicit reference to Solari, which here I have
placed in square brackets) and placed it as an epigraph to the COP pages, which
were sent to all the correspondents:
recognizing that value judgements are indeed part of economics, the natu-
ralistic character of economics is denied, and what is recognized is that eco-
nomics belongs among the moral sciences, which are sciences that do not
merely deal with facts that have come about or been performed arbitrarily:
for economics is a science of facts that are not yet but must be set in rela-
tion with higher requirements of human nature. To say that it is a science of
values and ends means that it is not justied simply through the application
of the category of causality, as is the case with any natural science. Rather, it
also implies the category of freedom, without which one cannot conceive of
the world of duty. But who sets those ends that give orientation and value to
economic investigation? The empirical or rational individual, or a reality that
transcends such an individual? Where should one look for the truth criterion
of the value or of the end? In the individual, in the collective community?
It should by no means be presumed that the state can stand as a judge of
the supreme values and ends. Here the investigation undergoes a shift from
the scientic to the philosophical plane. [And you too, it seems to me, have
reached the verge of this threshold.] Faith in an ideal can be justied only
if it forms part of a general conception of life and reality. Economics, like
all the sciences that deal with ends, cannot sidestep this imperative. Only
an economist who conceives of economics within the limits of a descriptive
and causal science (this is to say, naturalistic and mathematical) can sidestep
this imperative. [But you go beyond these limits and proclaim a faith that
is not only economic but also ethical and philosophical. And this is Croce’s
(E. 1942b)
By setting this passage by Solari as an epigraph in the COP (but without the
phrases in square brackets), Einaudi was aiming to receive further comments on
it from all his correspondents.
I will focus on the content and meaning of Einaudi’s rewriting in more detail in
the Introduction and Afterword.
6 Editorial decisions
The second version contains modications introduced directly in an offprint of
the rst edition: these are handwritten changes in cases where alterations and/
or insertions are relatively short, whereas longer changes/insertions are typed on
Review Copy Only - Not for Redistribution
Paolo Silvestri - University of Turin - 4/24/17
xxii Editorial foreword
additional and numbered pages. In both cases, the modications and insertions
Einaudi introduced to the text for the republication of his essay are marked clearly
and precisely for the printer using the publishing symbols generally adopted in
The frontispiece of the offprint features acknowledgements and words of
thanks to his four correspondents (Solari, Passerin d’Entreves, Bruguier Pacini,
Giolitti) and an indication to ‘reproduce the conclusions [of the rst edition] in
the Bibliographical Note’.
All the evidence I uncovered that pointed in the direction of conrmation
for the earlier described index of a collection of essays came to light after I had
already received Routledge’s acceptance of my proposal for publication as well as
during my thinking and writing process and/or while revising some partial trans-
lations of the present essay. All these discoveries occurred at diverse moments
and led to considerable delays, second thoughts and continuous modications and
rewritings of what I (time and again) thought to be my last version. Above all, this
stop-and-go process left me feeling somewhat skeptical with regard to my initial
intention of republishing Einaudi’s present essay with a purpose-designed Appen-
dix that would highlight very precisely all the variations and departures from the
rst edition. Not only would the Appendix have become particularly tortuous and
would have made difcult reading, but the undertaking would have called for a
philological and annotated apparatus to allow detailed comparison both between
the rst edition and the present essay and between the present essay and the other
rewritten essays composing the collection.
Readers willing to make a comparison between the rst edition and the present
essay will now nd their work “simplied” by the recent publication, in English,
of the rst edition (E. 1942–43 [2014a]). However, a rigorous comparison is not
a simple task. Firstly, because of the many changes and corrections introduced by
Einaudi. Secondly, because the present translation of Einaudi’s text is the result of
a cooperative effort between the translator and myself, and reects my understand-
ing of its contents and meaning. In turn, my understanding has been mediated by
Einaudi’s second thoughts on his own rst edition that helped me to clarify the
meaning of various words and phrases, including words and phrases that have not
undergone any change. In any case, to facilitate the task of comparison with the
rst edition, in the present essay the old numbering of the sections has been main-
tained and is now indicated in square brackets. In the end, I felt it was preferable to
highlight and explain Einaudi’s variations and additions to the rst edition – above
all, in cases where I regarded the variations as particularly signicant and/or not
easily understandable – through ad hoc reections, even at the cost of making the
Introduction and the Afterword longer and/or more laborious to read. Indisput-
ably, however, all the recent discoveries of the other unpublished revised versions
of essays that were due to be incorporated into the collection would call for a far
more extensive interpretive and philological investigation in order to gain insight
into Einaudi’s overall design and into all the reconsiderations and second thoughts
that streamed into his mind during that impassioned period of intellectual fervor.
Review Copy Only - Not for Redistribution
Paolo Silvestri - University of Turin - 4/24/17
Editorial foreword xxiii
In the end, the absence of several pages of the revised versions of other essays
by Einaudi and the absence of the complete index of such a collection, together
with the subsequent delays in delivery of the overall work due to my discovery of
unpublished revised versions of other essays while I was already engaged on the
main work and, above all, the uncertainty with regard to the time scale that would
be required for further research in the Archive persuaded me to delay no longer
and to respect (for once!) the target date for delivery to Routledge.
In short, whatever its evolutionary background, this essay is undoubtedly a
unicum in Einaudi’s scientic production, and it deserves to be published in its
own right, regardless of any further episodes that may come to light in the future.
For On Abstract and Historical Hypotheses and on Value Judgments in Eco-
nomic Sciences, the following editorial decisions were made.
All the modications, corrections and insertions made by Einaudi have been
faithfully reproduced. Only in rare cases, and only for reasons pertaining to the
translation, does the punctuation sometimes differ from the original.
The Bibliographical Note, which contains the last two pages of the conclusions
to the rst edition, has been reproduced at the end of the present essay. Despite
the absence of Einaudi’s comments that were due to complete the aforesaid Bib-
liographical Note, I felt it was important to reproduce the previous conclusions in
the form in which they were intended to be presented, given their importance and
usefulness for a greater understanding of the conclusions rewritten in the present
I have restricted myself to adding a few notes to Einaudi’s text; such notes are
indicated as “[Editor’s note]”, but only in cases where Einaudi seems to make
either an implicit reference to a work of his or allusions to other texts he does not
mention in a footnote. At times, I have also included a brief explanation of words
or expressions that cannot easily be translated into English.
With regard to the many problems surrounding the difcult translation of Ein-
audi’s text, I will restrict myself to the following comment. The Italian word
schema used by Einaudi could have been translated with “model”, according to
current usage, given, also, that in this same text the Italian words ipotesi [hypoth-
esis], schema or modello [model] are at times used as synonyms. However, the
important terminological observation made by Einaudi in note 4 (p. 48) concern-
ing the difference between ipotesi and schema led the tranlsator and me to render
it with the Classical Greek term “schema” (pl.: “schemata”). To translate modello,
on the other hand, we opted for the term “model” wherever Einaudi explicitly
uses it.
Review Copy Only - Not for Redistribution
Paolo Silvestri - University of Turin - 4/24/17
Albert G. (2004). Pareto’s Sociological Positivism. Journal of Classical Sociology, 4, 1:
Allingham M.G., Sandmo A. (1972). Income Tax Evasion: A Theoretical Analysis. Journal
of Public Economics, 1: 323–338.
Alm J. (2014). Expanding the Theory of Tax Compliance from Individual to Group Moti-
vations. In F. Forte, R. Mudambi, P.M. Navarra (eds.), A Handbook of Alternative Theo-
ries in Public Economics. Chelthenam, UK: Edward Elgar, 260–277.
Alm J., McClelland G.H., Schulze W.D. (1992). Why Do People Pay Taxes? Journal of
Public Economics, 48, 1: 21–38.
Andreoni J. (1988). Why Free Ride? Strategies and Learning in Public Good Experiments.
Journal of Public Economics, 37: 291–304.
Andreoni J. (1990). Impure Altruism and Donation to Public Goods: A Theory of Warm-
Glow Giving. The Economic Journal, 100: 464–447.
Anspach M. (2002 [2007]). A charge de revanche: Figures élémentaires de la réciprocité.
Paris: Edition du Seuil. It. transl.: A buon rendere. La reciprocità nella vendetta nel dono
e nel mercato. Torino: Bollati Boringhieri.
Backhaus J.G. (ed.) (2013). Essentials of Fiscal Sociology: Conceptions of an Encyclope-
dia, Series: Finanzsoziologie – Vol. 5. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
Backhaus J.G., Wagner R.E. (2005a). From Continental Public Finance to Public Choice:
Mapping Continuity. History of Political Economy, Annual Supplement, 37: 314–332.
Backhaus J.G., Wagner R.E. (2005b). Continental Public Finance: Mapping and Recover-
ing a Tradition. Journal of Public Finance and Public Choice, 23: 43–67.
Backhouse R.E., Dudley-Evans A., Henderson W. (1993). Exploring the Language and
Rhetoric of Economics. In W. Henderson, A. Dudley-Evans, R. Backhouse (eds.), Eco-
nomics and Language. London & New York: Routledge, 1–20.
Bafgi A. (2010). Teoria economica e legislazione sociale nel testo delle “Lezioni”. In
Gigliobianco (2010), 48–89.
Baranzini R., Bridel P. (1997). On Pareto’s First Lectures on Pure Economics at Lausanne.
History of Economics Ideas, 5, 3: 65–87.
Barucci P. (1974). Luigi Einaudi e la storia del ‘dogma’ economico. Note economiche, VII,
4: 39–68.
Baujard A. (2013). Value Judgments and Economics Expertise. Working Paper GATE
Becker G. (1968). Crime and Punishment: An Economic Approach. Journal of Political
Economy, 76: 169–217.
Bellanca N. (1993). La teoria della nanza pubblica in Italia, 1883–1946. Saggio storico 
sulla scuola italiana di economia pubblica. Firenze: Leo Olschki.
Review Copy Only - Not for Redistribution
Paolo Silvestri - University of Turin - 4/24/17
138 Bibliography
Benda J. (1927). La trahison des clercs. Paris: Grasset.
Besley T. (2006). Principal Agent? The Political Economy of Good Government. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Binder C., Heilmann C., Vromen J. (2015). The Future of the Philosophy of Economics:
Papers from the XI. INEM Conference at Erasmus University Rotterdam. Journal of
Economic Methodology, 22, 3: 261–263.
Blaug M. (1980 [1992]). The Methodology of Economics: Or How Economists Explain.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Blaug M. (1998). The Positive-Normative Distinction. In J.B. Davis, D. Wade Hands, U.
Mäki (eds.), The Handbook of Economic Methodology. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar
Publishing, 370–374.
Bobbio N. (1964). Introduzione. In Pareto (1964), XII–XXXVMI.
Bobbio N. (ed.) (1973). Pareto e il sistema sociale. Firenze: Sansoni.
Bobbio N. (1974). Il pensiero politico di Luigi Einaudi. Annali della Fondazione Luigi
Einaudi, VIII: 183–215.
Bobbio N. (1983). Il Buongoverno. In Atti della Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei. Roma:
Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei, 235–244.
Bobbio N. (2012). Comandi e consigli. In Studi per una teoria generale del diritto. Torino:
Boccaccio M., De Bonis V. (2003). The Political Sociological Theories in the Italian Tradi-
tion of Public Finance. Il pensiero economico italiano, 11, 1: 75–97.
Böckenförde E.-W. (ed.) (1967 [1991]). Die Entstehung des Staates als Vorgang der Säku-
larisation. Engl. transl.: The Emergence of the State as a Process of Secularization. In
State, Society, and Liberty: Studies in Political Theory and Constitutional Law. New
York: Berg, 26–46.
Bodei R. (2003). Il ruolo dell’economia in Croce. Economia politica, XX, 2: 159–165.
Boland L. (1989). The Methodology of Economic Model Building: Methodology After
Samuelson. London: Routledge.
Borgatta G. (1920). Lo studio scientico dei fenomeni nanziari. Giornale degli Econo-
misti e Rivista di Statistica, 31, 60: 1–24 and 81–116. Engl. transl.: The Scientic Study
of Fiscal Phenomena. In McLure (2007), 203–248.
Bowles S., Gintis H. (2000). Reciprocity, Self-Interest, and the Welfare State. Nordic Jour-
nal of Political Economy, 26: 33–53.
Brennan G., Buchanan J.M. (1980 [2000]). The Power to Tax: Analytical Foundations of a
Fiscal Constitution. Indianapolis, IN: Liberty Fund, Inc.
Bresciani Turroni C. (1942). Introduzione alla politica economica. Einaudi: Torino.
Bruguier Pacini G. (1936). Economia ed etica. Civiltà fascista, III, 11: 697–708.
Bruguier Pacini G. (1937). Recensione a L. Einaudi, “Nuovi Saggi”. Leonardo. Firenze:
Febbraio, 69–70.
Bruguier Pacini G. (1943). Scienza economica, metodo storico e storicismo. Padova: Cedam.
Bruguier Pacini G. (1950). Luigi Einaudi moralista. Nistri-Lischi: Pisa.
Bruni L. (2002). Vilfredo Pareto and the Birth of Modern Microeconomics. Cheltenham,
UK: Edward Elgar.
Bruni L. (2003–2004). Che cos’è l’economia? Vailati, Pareto e Einaudi in dialogo. In Mar-
chionatti, Becchio (2003–2004), 149–164.
Bruni L. (2015). Critical Point. In A Lexicon of Social Well-Being. Houndsmill, UK: Pal-
grave Macmillan, 33–36.
Bruni L., Montesano A. (2009). Introduction. In L. Bruni, A. Montesano (eds.), New Essay
on Pareto’s Economic Theory. London & New York: Routledge.
Review Copy Only - Not for Redistribution
Paolo Silvestri - University of Turin - 4/24/17
Bibliography 139
Buchanan J.M. (1960). “La scienza delle Finanze”: The Italian Tradition in Fiscal Theory.
In Fiscal Theory and Political Economy: Selected Essays. Chapel Hill: The University
of North Carolina Press, 24–74.
Buchanan J.M. (1967 [1999]). Public Finance in Democratic Process: Fiscal Institutions
and Individual Choice. Indianapolis, IN: Liberty Fund.
Buchanan J.M. (2000 [2005]). The Soul of Classical Liberalism. In Why I, Too, Am Not a
Conservative: The Normative Vision of Classical Liberalism. Cheltenham, UK: Edward
Elgar, 52–61.
Buchanan J.M., Musgrave R.A. (1999). Public Finance and Public Choice: Two Contrast-
ing Visions of the State. Cambridge, MA & London, UK: MIT Press.
Busino G. (1973 [1975]). I fondamenti dell’economia e della sociologia nelle polemiche
tra il Pareto e il Croce. Rassegna Economica, XXXVII, 1095–1135. In Id. Sociologia e
storia. Guida: Napoli, 331–369.
Busino G. (2000). The Signication of Vilfredo Pareto’s Sociology. Revue européenne des
sciences sociales, 38, 117: 217–228.
Cabiati A. (1940). Intorno ad alcune recenti indagini sulla teoria pura del collettivismo.
Rivista di Storia Economica, 5, 2: 73–110.
Caldwell B. (1982). Beyond Positivism: Economic Methodology in the Twentieth Century.
London: Allen & Unwin.
Castro Caldas J., Neves V. (2012). The Meaning of Objectivity: What Can We Learn from
Robbins and Myrdal? In José Castro Caldas and Vítor Neves (eds.), Facts, Values and
Objectivity in Economics. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge, 67–84.
Cavalieri D. (1994). Il corporativismo nella storia del pensiero economico italiano: una
rilettura critica. Il pensiero economico italiano, II, 2: 7–49. Engl. transl.: Corporatism
in Italian Economic Thought: A Reinterpretation. MPRA Paper No. 43839, posted Janu-
ary 25, 2013,
Colander D., Su H.C. (2013). A Failure to Communicate: The Fact-Value Divide and the
Putnam-Dasgupta Debate. Erasmus Journal for Philosophy and Economics, 6, 2: 1–23.
Colander D., Su H.C. (2015). Making Sense of Economists’ Positive-Normative Distinc-
tion. Journal of Economic Methodology, 22, 2: 157–170.
Cowell F., Witzum A. (eds.) (2009). Lionel Robbins’s Essay on the Nature and Signicance 
of Economic Science. 75th Anniversary Conference Proceedings. London: Sunctory and
Toyota International Centres for Economic Research and Development.
Cox J.C. (2012). Private Goods, Public Goods, and Common Pools with Homo Recipro-
cans. Southern Economic Journal, 79, 1: 1–14.
Croce B. (1900 [1953]). Sul principio economico. Lettera al professore Vilfredo Pareto.
Giornale degli Economisti. July 15–26. Engl. transl.: On the Economic Principle. A Let-
ter to Professor V. Pareto. International Economic Papers, 3: 172–190.
Croce B. (1901 [1953]). Replica all’articolo del prof. Pareto. Giornale degli Economisti,
February, 121–130. Engl. transl.: On the Economic Principle. A Reply to Professor V.
Pareto. International Economic Papers, 3: 197–202.
Croce B. (ed.) (1906 [1961]). Economia losoca ed economia naturalistica. In Material-
ismo storico ed economia marxistica. Bari: Laterza, 265–275.
Croce B. (1907 [1964]). Logica come scienza del concetto puro. Bari: Laterza.
Croce B. (1909 [1945]). Filosoa della pratica. Economia ed etica. Bari: Laterza.
Croce B., Einaudi L. (1957). Liberismo e liberalismo. ed. by P. Solari. Milano-Napoli:
Croce B., Einaudi L. (1988). Carteggio (1902–1953). a cura di L. Firpo & Torino: Fon-
dazione L. Einaudi.
Review Copy Only - Not for Redistribution
Paolo Silvestri - University of Turin - 4/24/17
140 Bibliography
Cullis J.G., Lewis A. (1997). Why People Pay Taxes: From a Conventional Economic
Model to a Model of Social Convention. Journal of Economic Psychology, 18: 305–321.
Da Empoli D. (2002). The Theory of Fiscal Illusion in a Constitutional Perspective. Public
Finance Review, 30, 5: 377–384.
Da Empoli D. (2010). Lo stato e il progresso economico e sociale. In Gigliobianco (2010),
Dasgupta P. (2005). What Do Economists Analyze and Why: Values or Facts? Economics
and Philosophy, 21: 221–278.
D’Auria M. (2012). Junius and the ‘President Professor’: Luigi Einaudi’s European Fed-
eralism. In M. D’Auria, M. Hewitson (eds.), Europe in Crisis: Intellectuals and the
European Idea, 1917–1957. New York: Berghahn Books, 289–304.
Davis J.B. (2014). Economists’ Odd Stand on the Positive-Normative Distinction: A Behav-
ioral Economics View. In G. DeMartino, D. McCloskey (eds.), Handbook on Profes-
sional Economic Ethics: Views from the Economics Profession and Beyond. Oxford:
Oxford University Press. doi: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199766635.013.011
Davis J.B., Marciano A., Runde J. (eds.) (2004). The Elgar Companion of Economics and
Philosophy. Aldershot: Edward Elgar.
Della Valle V. (2010). La lingua di Luigi Einaudi fra classicismo e pathos. In Gigliobianco
(2010), 138–154.
Del Vecchio G. (1935 [1954]). Droit et économie. Revue d’Économie Politique, XLIX:
1457–1494, tr. it. Diritto ed economia, n. ed. riv. con una postilla. Roma: Studium.
de Marchi N. (ed.) (1988). The Popperian Legacy in Economics. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
de Marchi N. (ed.) (1992). Post-Popperian Methodology of Economics: Recovering Prac-
tice. Boston: Kluwer.
DeMartino G. (2011). The Economist’s Oath: On the Need for and Content of Professional
Economic Ethics. New York: Oxford University Press.
DeMartino G. (2014). “Econogenic Harm”: On the Nature of and Responsibility for the
Harm Economists Do as They Try to Do Good. In G. DeMartino, D. McCloskey (eds.),
Conducting Ethical Economic Research: Complications from the Field. doi: 10.1093/
DeMartino G., McCloskey D. (eds.) (2014a). Handbook on Professional Economic Ethics:
Views from the Economics Profession and Beyond. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
DeMartino G., McCloskey D. (2014b). Introduction, or Why This Handbook? In G.
DeMartino, D. McCloskey (eds.), Conducting Ethical Economic Research: Complica-
tions from the Field. doi: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199766635.013.001
De Viti de Marco A. (1936). First Principles of Public Finance, with an Introduction by L. Ein-
audi, transl. by E. Pavlo Marget. London, Jonathan Cape & New York: Harcourt Brace & Co.
Di Iorio F. (2016). Introduction: Methodological Individualism, Structural Constraints, and
Social Complexity. Comos + Taxis. Studies in Emergent Order and Organization, 3/2, 3: 1–8.
Dow S.C. (2014). Codes of Ethics for Economists, Pluralism, and the Nature of Economic
Knowledge. In G. DeMartino, D. McCloskey (eds.), Conducting Ethical Economic
Research: Complications from the Field. doi: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199766635.013.041
Dupuy J.-P. (2002). Avions-nous oublié le mal? Penser la politique après l’11 septembre.
Paris: Bayard.
Einaudi L. (1907). Le entrate pubbliche dello Stato sabaudo nei bilanci e nei conti dei
tesorieri durante la guerra di successione spagnuola. Torino: F.lli Bocca.
Einaudi L. (1908). La nanza Sabauda all’aprirsi del secolo XVIII e durante la guerra di 
successione spagnuola. Torino: STEN.
Review Copy Only - Not for Redistribution
Paolo Silvestri - University of Turin - 4/24/17
Bibliography 141
Einaudi L. (1914). La nanza della guerra e delle opere pubbliche. Torino: Tip. E. Bono.
Einaudi L. (1917). Le confessioni di un economista. La riforma sociale, XXIV, XXVIII,
10: 563–568.
Einaudi L. (ed.) (1918 [1920]). Il dogma della sovranità e l’idea della società delle nazioni.
In Lettere politiche di Junius. Bari: Laterza, 143–156.
Einaudi L. (1920a). Prediche. Bari: Laterza.
Einaudi L. (ed.) (1920b [1963]). Perché la guerra continua. In Cronache economiche e
politiche di un trentennio (1893–1925). Vol. V. Torino: Einaudi, 967–977.
Einaudi L. (1920c). Lettere politiche di Junius. Bari: Laterza.
Einaudi L. (1921). La scienza economica ha fatto bancarotta? Corriere della sera, 1.
Einaudi L. (1922 [1988]). Avvertenza del compilatore. In F. Fracchia, Appunti per la storia
politica ed amministrativa di Dogliani, raccolti e ordinati da L. Einaudi. Torino: Tip. San
Giuseppe degli artigianelli, V–XII. Reprint in Pagine doglianesi, 1893–1943. Dogliani:
Municipality and the “Luigi Einaudi” Civic Library, 32–34.
Einaudi L. (1923 [2006]). The Beauty of the Struggle. In Einaudi (2006), 66–72.
Einaudi L. (1925). Prefazione. In J.S. Mill, La libertà. Torino: Piero Gobetti editore, 3–6.
Einaudi L. (1926a). La ne del laissez-faire? La Riforma Sociale, XXXVII, 11–12: 570–
573 Engli. transl.: The end of laissez faire?. In Einaudi (2006), 80–84.
Einaudi L. (1926b). Piero Gobetti nelle memorie e nelle impressioni dei suoi maestri. Il
Baretti, III, 3, 16 Marzo (1926), 80.
Einaudi L. (1928a). Dei concetti di liberismo economico e di borghesia e sulle origini
materialistiche della guerra. La Riforma sociale, XXXV, XXXIX, 9–10: 501–516.
Einaudi L. (1928b [1933]). Recensione a A.C. Pigou, “A Study in Public Finance”. La
riforma sociale, XXXV, XXXIX, 3–4: 159–187. Reprint with the title: Di alcuni impor-
tanti problemi di nanza. A proposito dell’ultima opera del Pigou, in Einaudi L. (1933).
Saggi, parte II. Torino: Edizioni de “La riforma sociale”, 93–123.
Einaudi L. (1930). Se esista storicamente la pretesa ripugnanza degli economisti verso
il concetto dello stato produttore. Nuovi studi di diritto, economia e politica, IV, V:
Einaudi L. (1932a). Del modo di scrivere la storia del dogma economico. La Riforma
Sociale, XXXIX, XLIII, 2: 207–219.
Einaudi L. (1932b). Ancora intorno al modo di scrivere la storia del dogma economico. La
Riforma Sociale, XXXIX, XLIII, 3: 308–313.
Einaudi L. (1933). La condotta economica e gli effetti sociali della guerra italiana. Bari:
Einaudi L. (1936a [1953] [1960]). Il peccato originale e la teoria della classe eletta in
Federico le Play. Rivista di storia economica, I, 2: 85–118. Reprint in L. Einaudi
(1953), 307–344. Engl. transl.: “The doctrine of original sin and the theory of the
elite in the writings of Frédéric Le Play”, in Louis Sommers (ed. and transl.) (1960),
Essays in European Economic Thought. Princeton, NJ: D. Van Nostrand Company
Inc., 162–217.
Einaudi L. (1936b). Introduction. In De Viti de Marco (1936), 19–30.
Einaudi L. (1936c). Morale et économique. Revue d’économie politique, XLX: 289–311.
Einaudi L. (1936d). Lo strumento economico nell’interpretazione della storia. Rivista di
Storia Economica, I, 1: 149–158.
Einaudi L. (1936e). Teoria della moneta immaginaria nel tempo da Carlomagno alla Riv-
oluzione francese. Rivista di storia economica, I, 1: 1–35. Engl. transl.: The Theory
of Imaginary Money from Charlemagne to the French Revolution. In Einaudi (2006),
Review Copy Only - Not for Redistribution
Paolo Silvestri - University of Turin - 4/24/17
142 Bibliography
Einaudi L. (1937). Tema per gli storici dell’economia: dell’anacoretismo economico. Riv-
ista di Storia Economica, II, 2: 186–195.
Einaudi L. (1938a). Di una prima stesura della “Ricchezza delle nazioni” e di alcune tesi di
Adamo Smith intorno alla attribuzione dei frutti del lavoro. Rivista di Storia Economica,
III, 1: 50–60.
Einaudi L. (1938b). Miti e paradossi della giustizia tributaria. Torino: Einaudi.
Einaudi L. (1939). Del metodo nella storia delle dottrine. Rivista di Storia Economica, IV,
3: 234–237.
Einaudi L. (1940a [2014]). Miti e paradossi della giustizia tributaria, II ed. Torino: Ein-
audi. Partial transl.: Myths and Paradoxes of Justice in Taxation. In Einaudi (2014a),
Einaudi L. (1940b [1945]). Principii di scienza delle nanze, III ed. Torino: Einaudi.
Einaudi L. (1940c). Le premesse del ragionamento economico e la realtà storica. Rivista di
Storia Economica, V, 3: 179–199.
Einaudi L. (1941a). Ancora sulle premesse del ragionamento economico. Rivista di Storia
Economica, VI, 1: 43–50.
Einaudi L. (1941b). Intorno al contenuto dei concetti di liberismo, comunismo, intervent-
ismo e simili. Argomenti, 9: 18–34.
Einaudi L. (1941c). Sismondi, economista appassionato. Rivista di Storia Economica, VI,
2: 127–134.
Einaudi L. (1941d). Mercantilismo, Calmieri, Tempora e Mores. Rivista di Storia Eco-
nomica, VI, 3: 153–176.
Einaudi L. (1941e). Saggi sul risparmio e l’imposta. Torino: Einaudi.
Einaudi L. (1942a). Scienza e storia, o dello stacco dello studioso dalla cosa studiata. Riv-
ista di Storia economica, VII, 1: 30–37.
Einaudi L. (1942b). Economia di concorrenza e capitalismo storico. La terza via fra i secoli
XVIII e XIX. Rivista di Storia Economica, VII, 2: 49–72.
Einaudi L. (1942c). Dell’uomo, ne o mezzo, e dei beni d’ozio (book review of L. Ban-
dini (1942). Uomo e valore, Torino: Einaudi). Rivista di Storia Economica, VII, 3–4:
Einaudi L. (1942d). Del concetto dello ‘stato fattore di produzione’ e delle sue relazioni col
teorema della esclusione del risparmio dall’imposta. Giornale degli economisti e annali
di economia, July/August: 301–331.
Einaudi L. (1942e). Di alcuni connotati dello stato elencati dai trattatisti nanziari. Rivista
di Diritto nanziario e Scienza delle Finanze, VI, 4: 191–200.
Einaudi L. (1942f). Postilla critica. Giornale degli Economisti e annali di economia, IV,
11/12: 512–517.
Einaudi L. (1942g [2014]). Introduzione. In Bresciani Turroni (1942). Engl. transl.: Intro-
duction. In L. Einaudi (2014), 193–196.
Einaudi L. (1942–43 [2014a]). Ipotesi astratte e ipotesi storiche e dei giudizi di valore nelle
scienze economiche. Atti della R. Accademia delle Scienze di Torino, 78, II: 57–119.
Engl. transl.: Abstract Hypotheses and Historical Hypotheses and on Value Judgments
in Economic Science. In R. Faucci, R. Marchionatti (eds.), Selected Economic Essays.
Vol. II. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 21–66.
Einaudi L. (1943a). Discutendo con Fasiani e Griziotti di connotati dello Stato e di catasto e
imposta fondiaria. Rivista di Diritto nanziario e Scienza delle Finanze, VII, 3/4: 178–190.
Einaudi L. (1943b [2006]). Per una federazione economica europea. Roma: Movimento
liberale italiano. Engl. transl.: Why we need a European economic federation. In Einaudi
(2006), 245–249.
Einaudi L. (1944a [2001]). Liberalismo. In Einaudi (2001), 65–66.
Review Copy Only - Not for Redistribution
Paolo Silvestri - University of Turin - 4/24/17
Bibliography 143
Einaudi L. (1944b). I problemi economici della Federazione europea. Lugano: Edizioni
di Capolago.
Einaudi L. (1945a [2001]). Il mito dello stato sovrano. In Einaudi (2001), 96–100.
Einaudi L. (1945b). Prefazione. In Luigi Vittorio Berliri (ed.), La giusta imposta. Appunti
per un sistema giuridico della pubblica contribuzione. Lineamenti di una riforma organ-
ica  della  nanza  ordinaria. Edizioni dell’Istituto italiano di studi legislativi, V–VII.
Einaudi L. (1948). Principii di scienza delle nanze, IV ed. Torino: Einaudi.
Einaudi L. (1949a). Lezioni di politica sociale. Torino: Einaudi.
Einaudi L. (1949b). Stato monopolistico e stato cooperativo in De Viti De Marco. Rivista
di diritto nanziario e scienza delle nanze, VIII, 1: 5–7.
Einaudi L. (1949c). Prefazione. In G. Solari (ed.), Studi storici  di  losoa  del  diritto.
Torino: Giappichelli, V–XVII.
Einaudi L. (1950a [1955]). La scienza economica. Reminiscenze. 1896–1946. In C. Antoni,
R. Mattioli (eds.), Cinquant’anni di vita intellettuale italiana. 1896–1946. Scritti in
onore di Benedetto Croce per il suo ottantesimo anniversario. Napoli: Edizioni Scienti-
che Italiane, 293–316. Engl. transl.: Fifty Years of Italian Economic Thought: 1896–
1946: Reminiscences. International Economic Papers. London: Macmillan, 5: 7–25.
Einaudi L. (1950b). Mauro Fasiani. Rivista di diritto nanziario e scienza delle nanze, I:
Einaudi L. (1950c). Scienza economica ed economisti nel momento presente. Annuario
dell’Università degli studi di Torino, anno accademico 1949–50. Torino: Tip. Artigi-
anelli, 27–63. Engl. transl: Economic Science and Economists at the Present Day. In
Einaudi (2014a), 284–298.
Einaudi L. (1953). Saggi  bibliograci  e storici intorno alle dottrine  economiche. Roma:
Edizioni di storia e letteratura.
Einaudi L. (1954). Il  buongoverno. Saggi  di economia e politica (1897–1954). Ed. by E.
Rossi. Bari: Laterza.
Einaudi L. (ed.) (1956). Conoscere per deliberare. In Prediche inutili. Torino: Einaudi,
1–12. Engl. transl.: Know before legislating. In Einaudi (2006), 27–35.
Einaudi L. (1959). Miti e paradossi della giustizia tributaria. Torino: Einaudi.
Einaudi L. (1959–65). Cronache economiche e politiche di un trentennio, 8 volumes.
Torino: Einaudi.
Einaudi L. (1961). I consigli del buon senso di Luigi Einaudi. Il Mondo, novembre 28,
1961: 11–12.
Einaudi L. (1962). Politici ed economisti. Il Politico, Università di Pavia, XXVI, 2: 239–
251. Engl. transl.: Politicians and Economists. Il Politico, Università di Pavia, XXVI,
2: 253–263.
Einaudi L. (1971). Ricordo di Giovanni Vailati. G. Vailati, Epistolario (1891–1909), a cura
di G. Lanaro, con una introduzione di M. Dal Pra. Torino: Einaudi, XIX–XXVI.
Einaudi L. (1973). Scritti economici, storici e civili. Milano: Mondadori.
Einaudi L. (1994). Memorandum. Ed. by G. Berta. Marsilio: Venezia.
Einaudi L. (2000). From Our Italian Correspondent’: Luigi Einaudi’s Articles in The
Economist, 1908–1946, R. Marchionatti (ed.), two volumes. Firenze: Leo Olschki.
Einaudi L. (2001). Riessioni di un liberale sulla democrazia. 1943–1947, ed. by P. Soddu,
Firenze: Leo Olschki.
Einaudi L. (2006). Selected Economic Essays. Vol. 1. Ed. by Luca Einaudi, R. Faucci, R.
Machionatti. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Einaudi L. (2014a). Selected Economic Essays. Vol. 2. Ed. by R. Faucci, R. Machionatti.
New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Review Copy Only - Not for Redistribution
Paolo Silvestri - University of Turin - 4/24/17
144 Bibliography
Einaudi L. (2014b). Selected Political Essay. Vol. 3. Ed. by D. Da Empoli, C. Malandrino,
V. Zanone. New York: Palgrave McMillan.
Einaudi Luca, Faucci R., Marchionatti R. (2006). Introduction. In Einaudi (2006), 1–25.
Einaudi Luigi R. (2010). Le molteplici eredità. Un ricordo personale di Luigi Einaudi. In
Marchionatti, Soddu (2010), 309–335.
Einaudi M. (1988). Presentazione. In L. Einaudi (ed.), Pagine doglianesi, 1893–1943, a
cura del Comune e della biblioteca civica “Luigi Einaudi”. Dogliani, 11–12.
Eusepi G., Wagner R.E. (2013). Tax Prices in a Democratic Polity: The Continuing Rel-
evance of Antonio De Viti de Marco. History of Political Economy, Duke University
Press, 45, 1: 99–121.
Farese G. (2012). Luigi Einaudi. Soveria Mannelli: Rubbettino.
Fasiani M. (1932). Contributo alla teoria dell’“uomo corporativo”. Studi sassaresi, X, 4:
Fasiani M. (1932–33). Der gegenwärtige Stand der reine Theorie der Finanzwissenschaft
in Italien, parti I, II e III, in Zeitschrift für Nationalökonomie, Band III, Heft 5: 651–91;
Band IV, Heft 1: 79–107; Band IV, Heft 3: 357–88 (1932–33). Traduzione italiana, con
varianti del curatore: La teoria della nanza pubblica in Italia. In M. Finoia (eds.), Il
pensiero economico italiano (1850–1950). Bologna: Cappelli (1980), 117–202.
Fasiani M. (1937). Principii generali e politiche delle crisi. Annali d’economia, XII, 1–4:
Fasiani M. (1941). Principii di Scienza delle Finanze, 2 volumes. Torino: Giappichelli.
Fasiani M. (1942). Della teoria della produttività dell’imposta, del concetto di “stato fattore
della produzione”, e del teorema della doppia tassazione del risparmio. Giornale degli
Economisti e annali di economia, 11/12: 491–511.
Fasiani M. (1943a). Di alcuni connotati del gruppo pubblico e di una denizione dei bisogni
pubblici. Rivista di diritto nanziario e Scienza delle Finanze, June: 62–83.
Fasiani M. (1943b). “Postilla” a: Luigi Einaudi, “Discutendo con Fasiani e Griziotti di con-
notati dello Stato e di catasto e imposta fondiaria.” Rivista di diritto nanziario e Scienza 
delle Finanze, VII, 3–4, 190–191.
Fasiani M. (1949 [2007]). Contributi di Pareto alla scienza delle nanze. Giornale degli
Economisti e annali di economia, VIII, 3–4, March–April: 129–173. Reprinted in Vil-
fredo Pareto, l’economista e il sociologo: scritti nell’anniversario della nascita, Milano,
casa editrice Rodolfo Malfasi, 1949. Engl. transl.: Pareto’s Contributions to the Science
of Public Finance. In McLure (2007), 266–305.
Fasiani M. (1951). Principii di scienza delle nanze, seconda edizione riv. e ampl., 2 vol.
Torino: Giappichelli.
Faucci R. (1982). La scienza economica in Italia. Da Francesco Ferrara a Luigi Einaudi
(1850–1943). Napoli: Guida.
Faucci R. (1986). Einaudi. Torino: Utet.
Faucci R. (1989). Einaudi, Croce, Rossi: il liberalismo fra scienza economica e losoa.
Quaderni di Storia dell’Economia Politica, VII, 1: 113–133.
Faucci R. (2003). Croce e la scienza economica: dal marxismo al purismo alla critica del
liberismo. Economia politica, XX, 2, agosto, 167–184.
Faucci R. (2014). A History of Italian Economic Thought. London: Routledge.
Fausto D. (1998). The Role of the Coercive Element in Fiscal Choice in the Italian Tradi-
tion in Public Finance. Rivista Italiana degli Economisti, III, 1: 3–25.
Fausto D. (2003). An Outline of the Main Italian Contributions to the Theory of Public
Finance. Il pensiero economico italiano, XI, 1: 11–41.
Review Copy Only - Not for Redistribution
Paolo Silvestri - University of Turin - 4/24/17
Bibliography 145
Fausto D., De Bonis V. (eds.) (2003). The Theory of Public Finance in Italy from the Origin
to the 1940s. Il pensiero economico italiano, XI, 1.
Fedeli S., Forte F. (2013). The Sociological Theory of Fiscal Illusion and the Laffer Curve.
Reections on an Italian Case. In Backhaus (2013), 95–114.
Fehr E., Gächter S. (2000). Fairness and Retaliation. The Economics of Reciprocity. Jour-
nal of Economic Perspectives, 14: 159–181.
Feld L.P., Frey B.S. (2000). Trust Breeds Trust: How Taxpayers are Treated. Economics of
Governance, 3, 2: 87–99.
Feld L.P., Frey B.S. (2007). Tax Compliance as the Result of a Psychological Tax Contract:
The Role of Incentives and Responsive Regulation. Law and Policy, 29, 1: 102–120.
Fiori S. (2007). Attilio Cabati and the Debate on Market Socialism. History of Economic
Ideas, XV, 2: 127–141.
Fleetwood S. (ed.) (1999). Critical Realism in Economics: Development and Debate. Lon-
don & New York: Routledge.
Forbes D. (1975). Sceptical Whiggism, Commerce and Liberty. In A.S. Skinner, T. Wilson
(eds.), Essay on Adam Smith. Clarendon: Oxford, 179–201.
Forte F. (1982). Luigi Einaudi: il mercato e il buon governo. Torino: Einaudi.
Forte F. (2009). L’economia liberale di Luigi Einaudi. Saggi. Firenze: Leo Olschki.
Forte F. (2012). The Architecture of Luigi Einaudi’s Good Government. In Heritier, Sil-
vestri (2012a), 13–32.
Forte F., Marchionatti R. (2012). Luigi Einaudi’s Economics of Liberalism. The European
Journal of the History of Economic Thought, 19, 4: 587–624.
Forte F., Silvestri P. (2013). Pareto’s Sociological Maximum of Utility of the Community
and the Theory of the Elites. In Backhaus (2013), 231–265.
Fossati A. (2011). The Italian Tradition in Public Finance: An Annotated Bibliography of
Mauro Fasiani. Studi Economici, 3: 5–122.
Fossati A. (2012). Pareto’s Inuence on Scholars from the Italian Tradition in Public
Finance. Journal of the History of Economic Thought, 34: 43–66.
Fossati A. (2013). Vilfredo Pareto’s Inuence on the Italian Tradition in Public Finance:
A Critical Assessment of Mauro Fasiani’s Appraisal. The European Journal of the His-
tory of Economic Thought, 20: 466–488.
Fossati A. (2014a). Luigi Einaudi e Mauro Fasiani: il dibattito epistemologico dal 1941 al
1943. Il Pensiero Economico Italiano, 22, 1: 91–153.
Fossati A. (2014b). The Luigi Einaudi vs. Mauro Fasiani Epistemological Debate (1938–
1943): The End of the Italian Tradition in Public Finance. Studi Economici, 113: 5–33.
Fossati A. (2015). Notes in the Margin to a Recent Collection of Essays by Luigi Einaudi.
Studi Economici, 115: 86–99.
Fossati A. (unpublished). The Fiscal Economics of Antonio De Viti de Marco Revisited.
Fossati A., Silvestri P. (2012). Un inedito dissidio epistemologico sui Miti e paradossi della
giustizia tributaria di Einaudi: le lettere perdute di Mauro Fasiani. Studi Economici, 3:
Frey B.S. (1997). A Constitution for Knaves Crowds Out Civic Virtues. Economic Journal,
107: 1043–1053.
Friedman M. (1953). Essays in Positive Economics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Fullbrook E. (ed.) (2009). Ontology and Economics: Tony Lawson and His Critics. Lon-
don: Routledge.
Fusco A.M. (2009). Luigi Einaudi e John Maynard Keynes. Prediche e profezie. In Visite in
softta. Saggi di Storia del pensiero economico. Napoli: Editoriale scientica, 185–218.
Review Copy Only - Not for Redistribution
Paolo Silvestri - University of Turin - 4/24/17
146 Bibliography
Garofalo G. (2012). Luigi Einaudi and Federico Caffè: Outlines of a Social Policy for
Good Governance. In Heritier, Silvestri (2012a), 45–56.
Gellner E. (1990). La trahison de la trahison de clercs. In I. Mclean, A. Monteore, P.
Winch (eds.), The Political Responsibility of Intellectuals. Cambridge: Cambridge Uni-
versity Press, 17–27.
Gigliobianco A. (ed.) (2010). Luigi Einaudi: Libertà economica e coesione sociale. Bari:
Gintis H. (2000). Beyond Homo Oeconomicus: Evidence from Experimental Economics.
Ecological Economics, 35: 311–322.
Giolitti A. (1943). [Review of] “W. Röpke, Die Gesellshaftskrisis der Gegenwart”.
Archivio della cultura italiana, V, 1, gennaio-giugno: 98–102.
Giordano A. (2006). Il pensiero politico di Luigi Einaudi. Genova: Name.
Giurato L. (2009). Searching for Fairness in Taxation: Lessons from the Italian School of
Public Finance. In G. Brennan, G. Eusepi (eds.), The Economics of Ethics and the Ethics
of Economics: Values, Markets and the State. Cheltenham & Northampton, UK: Edward
Elgar, 161–187.
Granovetter M. (1978). Threshold Models of Collective Behavior. American Journal of
Sociology, 83, 6: 1420–1443.
Groenewegen P. (1996). Introduction. In P. Groenewegen (ed.), Economics and Ethics?.
London: Routledge 1–14.
Hamlin A., Pettit P. (eds.) (1989). The Good Polity. Normative Analysis of the State.
Oxford: Blackwell.
Hausman D.M. (1988). An Appraisal of Popperian Methodology. In de Marchi (1988),
Hausman D.M. (2013). Philosophy of Economics. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philoso-
phy (Winter 2013 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.),
Hausman D.M., McPherson M.S. (2006). Economic Analysis, Moral Philosophy and Pub-
lic Policy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hayek F.A.v. (ed.) (1935). Collectivist Economic Planning. London: Routledge & Kegan
Hayek F.A.v. (1967). Studies in Philosophy, Politics and Economics. Chicago: University
of Chicago Press.
Hayek F.A.v. (1970 [2014]). The Market and Other Orders. Ed. by B. Caldwell. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press.
Hayek F.A.v. (1973). Law, Legislation and Liberty, Vol I: Rules and Order. Chicago: Uni-
versity of Chicago Press.
Hayek F.A.v. (1976). Law, Legislation and Liberty, Vol II: The Mirage of Social Justice.
Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Heritier P. (2007). Società post-hitleriane? Materiali didattici di estetica giuridica 2.0.
Torino: Giappichelli.
Heritier P. (2012a). Useless Non-Preaching? The Critical Point and the Complex Anthro-
pology of Freedom in Luigi Einaudi. In Heritier, Silvestri (2012a), 275–312.
Heritier P. (2012b). Estetica Giuridica. A partire da Legendre: Il fondamento nzionale del 
diritto positivo. Vol. II. Torino: Giappichelli.
Heritier P., Silvestri P. (eds.) (2012a). Good Government, Governance and Human Com-
plexity. Luigi Einaudi’s Legacy and Contemporary Society. Firenze: Leo Olschki.
Heritier P., Silvestri P. (2012b). Introduction. Luigi Einaudi: Poised Between Ideal and
Real. In Heritier, Silvestri (2012a), VII–XVIII.
Review Copy Only - Not for Redistribution
Paolo Silvestri - University of Turin - 4/24/17
Bibliography 147
Jannacone P. (1912). Il “paretaio”. La riforma sociale, XIX, XXIII, 5: 337–368.
Kant I. (1794 [1991]). Idea for a Universal History with a Cosmopolitan Purpose. In H.S.
Reiss (ed.), Kant. Political Writings. Cambridge Texts in the History of Political Thought
(2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 41–53.
Kayaalp O. (1985). Public Choice Elements in the Italian Theory of Public Goods. Public
Finance/Finances Publiques, 3: 395–410.
Kayaalp O. (1989). Early Italian Contributions to the Theory of Public Finance: Pantaleoni,
De Viti De Marco, and Mazzola. In D.A. Walker (ed.), Perspectives on the History of
Economic Thought. Vol. I. Aldershot: Edward Elgar, 155–166.
Kayaalp O. (2004). The National Element in the Development of Fiscal Theory. NewYork:
Palgrave Macmillan.
Keynes J.M. (1926). The End of Laissez-Faire. London: Hogarth Press.
Kimball R. (2009). The Treason of the Intellectuals and “The undoing of thought”. In
J. Benda (ed.), The Treason of the Intellectuals. New Brunswick & London: Transaction
Publishers, IX–XXVIII.
Lawson T. (1994). A Realist Theory for Economics. In Roger E. Backhouse (ed.), New
Direction in Economics Methodology. London: Routledge, 257–285.
Lawson T. (1997). Economics and Reality. London: Routledge.
Lawson T. (2003). Reorienting Economics. London: Routledge.
Leoni B. (1964). Luigi Einaudi e la scienza del governo. Torino: Einaudi.
Le Play F. (1877). L’organisation du travail selon la coutume des ateliers et la loi du
décalogue : avec un précis d’observations comparées sur la distinction du bien et du
mal dans le régime du travail, les causes du mal actuel et les moyens de réforme, les
objections et  les  réponses, les difcultés et  les  solutions (4th ed.). Tours: A. Mame
et ls.
Le Play F. (1878). La réforme sociale en France déduite de l’observation comparée des
peuples européens (6th ed.). Tours: A. Mame et ls.
Le Play F. (1881). La constitution essentielle de l’humanité: exposé des principes et des
coutumes qui créent la prospérité ou la souffrance des nations. Tours: A. Mame et ls.
Liberati P., Paradiso M. (2014). The Positive Theory of Benet Taxation in the Italian
School of Public Finance. Working Papers no. 190. Dipartimento di Economia Univer-
sità degli studi Roma Tre.
Machlup F. (1969). Positive and Normative Economics. In R. Heilbroner (ed.), Economic
Means and Political Ends. Essays in Political Economics. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-
Hall, 99–124.
MacKenzie D., Muniesa F., Siu L. (eds.) (2007). Do Economists Make Markets? On the
Performativity of Economics. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Magnani I. (2005). Il paretaio. Economia politica. Rivista di teoria e analisi, XXII, 1:
Mäki U. (1998). Realisticness. In U. Mäki, J.B. Davis, D.W. Hands (eds.), The Handbook
of Economic Methodology, Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar, 409–413.
Mäki U. (2000). Reclaiming Relevant Realism. Journal of Economic Methodology, 7, 1:
Mäki U. (2012). Realism and Antirealism About Economics. In U. Mäki (ed.), D.M. Gab-
bay, P. Thagard and J. Woods (series eds.), Philosophy of Economics (series Handbook
of the Philosophy of Science, Volume 13). Amsterdam: Elsevier, 3–24.
Marchionatti R. (2000a). L’economia sperimentale di Vilfredo Pareto. In R. Marchionatti,
C. Malandrino (eds.), Economia, sociologia e politica nell’opera di Vilfredo Pareto.
Firenze: Leo Olschki, 97–122.
Review Copy Only - Not for Redistribution
Paolo Silvestri - University of Turin - 4/24/17
148 Bibliography
Marchionatti R. (2000b). La ‘pericolosità del camminare dritti sui li di rasoio’. Einaudi
critico di Keynes. In C. Malandrino (ed.), Una rivista all’avanguardia. La Riforma
sociale 1894–1935. Firenze: Leo Olschki, 379–415.
Marchionatti R., Becchio G. (eds.) (2003–2004). La scuola di Torino. Da Cognetti de Mar-
tiis a Einaudi. Torino: Quaderni dell’Università di Torino.
Marchionatti R., Cassata F., Becchio G., Mornati F. (2013). When Italian Economics “Was
Second to None”. Luigi Einaudi and the Turin School of Economics. The European
Journal of the History of Economic Thought, 20, 5: 776–811.
Marchionatti R., Gambino E. (1997). Pareto and Political Economy as a Science: Methodo-
logical Revolution and Analytical Advances in Economic Theory in the 1890s. Journal
of Political Economy, 105, 6: 1322–1348.
Marchionatti R., Mornati F. (2007). Introduction. In V. Pareto, R. Marchionatti, F. Mor-
nati (eds.), Considerations on the Fundamental Principles of Pure Political Economy.
London: Routledge, XI–XXIX.
Marchionatti R., Soddu P. (eds.) (2010). Luigi Einaudi nella cultura, nella società e nella
politica del Novecento. Firenze: Leo Olschki.
Masini F. (2009). Economics and Political Economy in Lionel Robbins’s Writing. Journal
of the History of Economic Thought, 31, 4: 421–436.
Masini F. (2012). Luigi Einaudi and the Making of the Neoliberal Project. History of Eco-
nomic Thought and Policy, 1, 1: 39–59.
Mauss M. (1990 [1923–24]). The Gift: The Form and Reason for Exchange in Archaic
Societies. New York: W.W. Norton & Company.
McCloskey D. (1985). The Rhetoric of Economics. Wisconsin: The University of Wiscon-
sin Press.
McCloskey D. (2006). The Bourgeois Virtues: Ethics for an Age of Commerce. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press.
McCloskey D. (2010). Bourgeois Dignity: Why Economics Can’t Explain the Modern
World. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
McLure M. (2007). The Paretian School and the Italian Fiscal Sociology. New York: Pal-
grave Macmillan.
Meacci F. (1998). Luigi Einaudi. In F. Meacci (ed.), Italian Economists of the 20th Cen-
tury. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
Medema S. (2005). ‘Marginalizing’ Government: From la scienza delle nanze to Wick-
sell. History of Political Economy, 37, 1: 1–25.
Medema S.G. (2009). The Hesitant Hand: Taming Self-Interest in the History of Economic
Ideas. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Michels R. (1932). Ancora intorno al modo di scrivere la storia del dogma economico. La
Riforma sociale, XXXIX, XLIII: 303–308.
Mongin P. (2006). Value Judgments and Value Neutrality in Economics. Economica, 72:
Montesano A. (2003). Croce e la scienza economica. Economia politica, XX, 2: 201–223.
Morelli U. (1990). Contro il mito dello stato sovrano. Luigi Einaudi e l’unità europea.
Milano: Franco Angeli.
Mornati F. (2004). La riessione epistemologica della Scuola di Torino: Pasquale Jannac-
cone critico di Pareto. Il Pensiero Economico Italiano, XII/2: 162–175.
Mornati F. (2006). An Analytical-Epistemological Reconstruction of the Genesis of Pare-
to’s Manuale di Economia Politica. Rivista Internazionale di Scienze Economiche e
Commerciali, LIII/4: 579–591.
Review Copy Only - Not for Redistribution
Paolo Silvestri - University of Turin - 4/24/17
Bibliography 149
Mosca G. (1982). Teorica dei governi e governo parlamentare. In G. Sola (ed.), Scritti
politici. Vol. I. Torino: Utet.
Mosca M. (2005). De Viti De Marco. Historian of economic analysis. The European Jour-
nal of the History of Economic Thought, 2: 241–259.
Murphy L., Nagel T. (2002). The Myth of the Owernship, Tax and Justice. New York:
Oxford University Press.
Musgrave R.A. (1939). The Voluntary Exchange Theory of Public Economy. The Quar-
terly Journal of Economics, 53, 2: 213–237.
Musgrave R.A., Peacock A. T. (1958a). Classics in the Theory of Public Finance. London:
Musgrave R.A., Peacock A.T. (1958b). Introduction. In Musgrave, Peacock (1958a),
Myrdal K.G. (1953). The Political Element in the Development of Economic Theory. Lon-
don: Routledge.
Myrdal K.G. (1958). Value in Social Theory. A Selection of Essays on Methodology. Lon-
don: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Oates W.E. (1985). On the Nature and Measurement of Fiscal Illusion: A Survey. Depart-
ment of Economics, University of Maryland.
Oddenino A., Silvestri P. (2011). Autonomie locali e istituzioni sovranazionali. Il problema
del buongoverno tra globalizzazione e localizzazione alla luce del pensiero einaudiano.
In S. Sicardi (ed.), Le autonomie territoriali e funzionali nella provincia di Cuneo in
prospettiva transfrontaliera (alla luce del principio di sussidiarietà), Napoli: ESI, Quad-
erni del Dipartimento di Scienze Giuridiche dell’Università di Torino, 97–132.
Offutt S. (2014). Ethics and the Government Economist. In G. DeMartino, D. McClos-
key (eds.), Conducting Ethical Economic Research: Complications from the Field. doi:
Pantaleoni M. (1883). Contributo alla teoria del riparto delle spese pubbliche. Rassegna
italiana, 15: 25–70.
Paradiso M. (2004). Einaudi e il mito del pareggio di bilancio. Il pensiero economico
italiano, XII, 2: 107–117.
Pareto V. (1900 [1953]). Sul fenomeno economico. Lettera a Benedetto Croce. Gior-
nale degli economisti, agosto, 139–162. Engl. transl.: On the Economic Phenomenon.
A Reply to Benedetto Croce. International Economic Papers, 3: 180–196.
Pareto V. (1901 [1953]). Ancora sul principio economico. Giornale degli economisti, feb-
braio, 131–138. Engl. transl.: On the Economic Principle. A Reply to Benedetto Croce.
International Economic Papers, 3: 180–196.
Pareto V. (1906). Manuale di economia politica, con una introduzione alla scienza sociale.
Milano: Società editrice libraria.
Pareto V. (1916 [1964]). Trattato di sociologia generale, Milano: Edizioni di Comunità.
Pareto V. (1917). Discorso per il Giubileo. In Scritti sociologici, ed. by G. Busino, Torino:
Utet, (1966), 729–736.
Pascal B. (2003). Pensées. Trans. W.F. Trotter, introduction by T.S. Elliot. Mineola, NY:
Dover Publications.
Passerin d’Entrèves A. (1937 [1992]). Morale, diritto ed economia. Libreria Internazionale
F.lli Treves, Pavia, reprint in Saggi di storia del pensiero politico. Dal medioevo alla
società contemporanea. Milano: F. Angeli, 341–357.
Passerin d’Entrèves A. (1940). The Medieval Contribution to Political Thought. Thomas
Aquinas, Marsilius of Padua, Richard Hooker. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Review Copy Only - Not for Redistribution
Paolo Silvestri - University of Turin - 4/24/17
150 Bibliography
Passerin d’Entrèves A. (1962). La dottrina dello Stato: elementi di analisi e di interpre-
tazione. Torino: Giappichelli. Engl. transl.: The Notion of the State. An Introduction to
Political Theory. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1969.
Passerin d’Entrèves A. (1971). Luigi Einaudi e la “storia delle dottrine”. Il Pensiero polit-
ico, IV: 450–456.
Peil J., van Staveren, I. (2009). Handbook of Economics and Ethics. Cheltenham, UK &
Northampton: Edward Elgar.
Persson T., Tabellini G. (2003). The Economic Effects of Constitutions. Cambridge, MA:
MIT Press.
Pigou A.C. (1928). A Study in Public Finance. London: Macmillan and Co.
Porta P.L. (2010). Libertà, mercato, giustizia sociale. In Gigliobianco (2010), 19–47.
Portinaro P.P. (1979). Luigi Einaudi, la sociologia e la questione dei giudizi di valore.
Annali della Fondazione Luigi Einaudi, XIII: 247–272.
Prato G. (1907). Il costo della guerra di successione spagnuola e le spese pubbliche in
Piemonte dal 1700 al 1713. Torino: F.lli Bocca.
Prato G. (1908). La vita economica in Piemonte a mezzo il secolo XVIII. Torino: STEN.
Putnam H. (2002). The Collapse of the Fact/Value Dichotomy, and Other Essays. Cam-
bridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Putnam H. (2012). For Ethics and Economics Without the Dichotomies. In Putnam, Walsh
(2012), 111–129. First published in 2003 in the Review of Political Economy, 15: 305–412.
Putnam H., Walsh V. (2012). Introduction. In H. Putnam, V. Walsh (eds.), The End of Value-
Free Economics. London: Routledge, 1–5.
Putnam R.D. (2001). Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community.
New York: Simon and Schuster.
Putnam R.D., Leonardi R., Nanetti R.Y. (1993). Making Democracy Work: Civic Tradi-
tions in Modern Italy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Puviani A. (1903). Teoria della illusione nanziaria. Palermo: Sandron.
Quadrio Curzio A., Rotondi C. (2005). Luigi Einaudi: il disegno istituzionale ed econom-
ico per l’Europa. In Luigi Einaudi: Istituzioni, mercato e riforma sociale. Roma: Acca-
demia nazionale dei Lincei, Bardi, 163–194.
Reviglio F. (2012). Government and Market Failures in Luigi Einaudi and To-day. In Heri-
tier, Silvestri (2012a), 33–44.
Robbins L. (1932). An Essay on the Nature and Signicance of Economic Science. London:
Romano R. (1973). Introduzione. In Einaudi (1973), XI–XLIII.
Romeo R. (1974). Luigi Einaudi e la storia delle dottrine e dei fatti economici. In Various
Authors, Commemorazione di Luigi Einaudi nel centenario della nascita (1874–1974).
Torino: Fondazione Luigi Einaudi, 93–114.
Röpke W. ([1942] 1946). Die Gesellshaftskrisis der Gegenwart, Ital. transl.: La crisi
sociale del nostro tempo. Roma: Einaudi.
Ross D., Kincaid H. (2009). Introduction: The New Philosophy of Economics. In D. Ross,
H. Kincaid (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Economics. Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 3–32.
Samuels W.J. (1990). Introduction. In W.J. Samuels (ed.), Economics as Discourse: An
Analysis of the Language of Economics. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1–14.
Scarantino A. (2009). On The Role of Values in Economics: Robbins and His Critics. Jour-
nal of the History of Economic Thought, 31: 449–473.
Schelling T.C. (1978). Micromotives and Macrobehavior. New York: Norton.
Review Copy Only - Not for Redistribution
Paolo Silvestri - University of Turin - 4/24/17
Bibliography 151
Schumpeter J.A. (1949). Science and Ideology. American Economic Review, XXXIX, 2:
Schumpeter J.A. (1954). History of Economic Analysis. New York: Oxford University
Seligman E. (1926). The Social Theory of Public Finance. Political Science Quarterly 41:
Sen A. (1970). Collective Choices and Social Welfare. Edinburgh: Oliver & Boyd.
Sen A. (1987). On Ethics and Economics. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
Sen A. (1997). On Economic Inequality: Expanded Edition with a Substantial Annexe by
James E. Foster and Amartya Sen. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Sensini G. (1912). La teoria della “rendita”. Roma: Loescher.
Silvestri P. (2006). Il buongoverno nel pensiero di Einaudi e Mosca: tra governo della legge
e governo degli uomini. Annali della Fondazione Luigi Einaudi, XL: 157–196.
Silvestri P. (2007). Rileggendo Einaudi e Croce: spunti per un liberalismo fondato su
un’antropologia della libertà. Annali della Fondazione Luigi Einaudi, XLI, 201–240.
Silvestri P. (2008a). Il liberalismo di Luigi Einaudi o del Buongoverno. Soveria Mannelli:
Silvestri P. (2008b). Il normativo nell’homo œconomicus, il normativo dell’homo œco-
nomicus. In E. Di Nuoscio, P. Heriter (eds.), Le culture di Babele. Saggi di antropologia
losoco-giuridica. Milano: Medusa, 173–192.
Silvestri P. (2009). Mosca, Rufni ed Einaudi. Politica, diritto ed economia in difesa della
libertà. In R. Marchionatti (ed.), La Scuola di economia di Torino. Co-protagonisti ed
epigoni. Firenze: Leo Olschki, 41–64.
Silvestri P. (2010a). Veritas, Auctoritas, Lex. Scienza economica e sfera pubblica: sulla
normatività del Terzo. Il pensiero economico italiano, 2: 37–65.
Silvestri P. (2010b). Liberalismo, legge, normatività. Per una rilettura epistemologica
del dibattito Croce–Einaudi. In R. Marchionatti, P. Soddu (eds.), Luigi Einaudi nella
cultura, nella società e nella politica del Novecento. Firenze: Leo Olschki, 211–239.
Silvestri P. (2011). Buon governo. In F. Grassi Orsini, G. Nicolosi (eds.), Dizionario del
liberalismo italiano. Vol. I. Soveria Mannelli: Rubbettino, 152–162.
Silvestri P. (2012a). The Ideal of Good Government in Luigi Einaudi’s Thought and Life:
Between Law and Freedom. In Heritier, Silvestri (2012a), 55–95.
Silvestri P. (2012b). After-Word. Which (Good-Bad) Man? For Which (Good-Bad) Polity?
In Heritier, Silvestri (2012a), 313–332.
Silvestri P. (2012c). Economia,  diritto  e  politica  nella  losoa  di  Croce.  Tra  nzioni, 
istituzioni e libertà. Torino: Giappichelli.
Silvestri P. (2012d). Il “good government” in Adam Smith: tra Jurisprudence, Political
Economy e Theory of Moral Sentiments. Teoria e critica della regolazione sociale,
Quaderno (2012), 1–30.
Silvestri P. (2015). Anthropology of Freedom and Tax Justice: Between Exchange and Gift.
Thoughts for an Interdisciplinary Research Agenda. Teoria e critica della regolazione
sociale, 2: 115–132.
Silvestri P. (2016). Disputed (Disciplinary) Boundaries. Philosophy, Economics and Value
Judgments. History of Economic Ideas, 2/XXVI (forthcoming).
Smart W. (1916). Second Thought of an Economist, With a Biographical Sketch by Thomas
Jones. London: Macmillan.
Smith A. (1776 [1976]). An Enquiry Into the Nature and Causes of The Wealth of Nations.
Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Review Copy Only - Not for Redistribution
Paolo Silvestri - University of Turin - 4/24/17
152 Bibliography
Solari G. (2006). Luigi Einaudi e il liberalismo democratico. Teoria politica, 2: 77–105.
Starobinski J. (1994). Largesse. Paris: Edition de la Réunion des Musées nationaux.
Stiglitz J.E. (2014). Ethics, Economic Advice, and Economic Policy. In G. DeMartino,
D. McCloskey (eds.), Conducting Ethical Economic Research: Complications from the
Field. doi: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199766635.013.020
Tomatis F. (2011). Verso la città divina. L’incantesimo della libertà in Luigi Einaudi.
Roma: Città Nuova.
Torgler B. (2007). Tax Compliance and Tax Morale: A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis,
Cheltenham, UK & Northampton: Edward Elgar Publishing.
Vailati G. (1898 [1957]). Alcune osservazioni sulle questioni di parole nella storia della
scienza e della cultura, Prolusione a un corso sulla storia della meccanica, letta il 12
dicembre 1898 all’Università di Torino. In Vailati (1957), 67–112.
Vailati G. (1906 [1957]). Pragmatismo e logica matematica. Leonardo, IV, febbraio: 16–25.
In Vailati (1957), 196–207.
Vailati G. (1957). Il metodo della losoa. Saggi scelti, ed. by Ferruccio Rossi-Landi. Bari:
van de Laar E., Peil J. (2009). Positive Versus Normative Economics. In Peil, van Staveren
(2009), 374–382.
Wagner R.E. (2003). Public Choice and the Diffusion of Classical Italian Public Finance.
Il pensiero economico italiano, XI, 1: 271–282.
Walsh V. (2009). Fact/Value Dichotomy. In Peil, van Staveren (2009), 144–151.
Walzer M. (1988). The Company of Critics. Social Criticism and Political Commitment in
the Twentieth Century. New York: Basic Books.
Weber M. (1949). The Methodology of the Social Sciences. Ed. and trans. E.A. Shils, H.A.
Finch. New York: Free Press.
Weston S. (2009). Positive-Normative Distinction in British History of Economic Thought.
In Peil, van Staveren (2009), 366–373.
Wicksell K. (1896 [1958]). Finanztheoretische Untersuchungen. Jena: Gustav Fischer.
Engl. transl.: A New Principle of Just Taxation. In Musgrave, Peacock (1958a), 72–118.
Wicksteed P.H. (1910). The Common Sense of Political Economy Including a Study of the
Human Basis of Econonomic Law. London: Macmillan and Co.
Winch D. (1978). Adam Smith’s Politics. An Essay in Historiographic Revision. Cam-
bridge: Cambridge University Press.
Yuengert A. (2000). The Positive-Normative Distinction Before the Fact-Value Distinction.
Pepperdine University.
Review Copy Only - Not for Redistribution
Paolo Silvestri - University of Turin - 4/24/17
Albert, G. 12, 122
Albertini, L. 29
Allingham, M.G. 130
Alm, J. 130
Andreoni, J. 130
Anspach, M. 132
Backhaus, J.G. xxxii
Backhouse, R.E. 32
Bafgi, A. 31, 136
Baranzini, R. xxxiv, 31
Barone, E. 58
Bastiat, F. 91
Becchio, G. xxxi, 32
Becker, G. 130
Bellanca, N. xxiv, xxxii, xxxiii, 10, 94
Benda, J. 29
Besley, T. 129
Binder, C. xxxii
Blaug, M. 31
Bobbio, N. 31, 129, 135
Boccaccio, M. 129
Boland, L. 31
Borgatta, G. 129
Boswell, J. 47
Bowles, S. 130
Bresciani Turroni, C. 24
Bridel, P. 31
Bruguier Pacini, G. x, xix, xx, xxii, xxv,
xxxi, 8, 9, 28, 112, 118
Bruni, L. 12, 31, 131, 136
Buchanan, J.M. xxiv, xxxii, 130, 132
Busino, G. 31, 136
Cabiati, A. 22 – 3
Caesar, Julius 41
Cairnes, J.E. 42
Caldwell, B. 31
Cantillon, R. xvi, 42, 73, 74
Cassata, F. 32
Castro Caldas, J. 30
Cavalieri, D. 29
Cournot, A. 44
Cowell, F. 30
Cox, J.C. 130
Croce, B. viii, xxi, xxv, xxx, xxxi, 6, 8 – 10,
14, 22 – 3, 26 – 9, 32 – 3, 119, 124 – 5,
127 – 8, 135 – 6
Cullis, J.G. 130
Da Empoli, D. 132
Dasgupta, P. 136
D’Auria, M. 32
Davis, J.B. xxxii, 31
De Bonis, V. xxxii, 129
Della Valle, V. 17, 32
Del Vecchio, G. 6 – 7, 9
de Marchi, N. 31
De Viti de Marco, A. xvi, xx, 13, 19, 30,
49, 94 – 100, 103 – 5, 107, 111, 116,
129 – 30
Dudley-Evans, A. 32
Dupuy, J.-P. 135
Einaudi, G. xi, xxxi
Einaudi, L.R. xxxiii, 113
Einaudi, M. 135
Eusepi, G. 129
Farese, G. xxxi
Faucci, R. xxxi, 3, 29, 31, 33, 104, 136
Fausto, D. 94
Fedeli, S. 132
Fehr, E. 130
Feld, L.P. xxxiv, 130
Ferrara, F. 3, 15, 29
Fiori, S. 32
Fleetwood, S. 134
Review Copy Only - Not for Redistribution
Paolo Silvestri - University of Turin - 4/24/17
154 Index
Forbes, D. 134
Forte, F. xxviii, xxxii, 18, 29, 32, 33,
100, 103, 122, 129 – 30
Fossati, A. xxiv, 5, 10, 12 – 14, 29 – 31, 129
Frey, B.S. 130
Friedman, M. 134
Fusco, A.M. xxxii
Gächter, S. 130
Gambino, E. 31
Garofalo, G. 129
Gellner, E. 29
Gintis, H. 130
Giolitti, A. x, xi, xix, xxii, xxv, xxxi, 28
Giordano, A. xxxi
Giurato, L. 130
Gobetti, P. 115
Gossen, H.H. xvi, 42, 73 – 4
Granovetter, M. 132
Griziotti, B. 10
Hamlin, A. 129
Hausman, D.M. xxxii, 31, 135
Hayek, F.A.v. 23, 25, 32, 131
Heilmann, C. xxxii
Henderson, W. 32
Henry IV 51 – 2, 103
Heritier, P. xxxii, xxxiii, 31, 113 – 14, 129,
131 – 2, 135
Hume, D. 2, 103
Jannacone, P. 14, 31
Jevons, W.S. 45, 73
Kant, I. 28, 135
Kayaalp, O. xxxii
Keynes, J.M. 6, 10, 29
Kimball, R. 29
Kincaid, H. xxxii
Kortmann, B. xxxiv
Kukathas, C. xxxiv
Lawson, T. 134
Leoni, B. 131
Le Play, F. xiii, 22, 91, 115, 131
Lewis, A. 130
Liberati, P. 130
Louis XIV 52, 60
Louis XV 55
Louis XVI 55
Mach, E. 136
Machlup, F. 31, 135
MacKenzie, D. 134
Madison, J. 135
Magnani, I. 31
Mäki, U. 134
Marchionatti, R. xxviii, xxxi – xxxiv,
18, 29, 31 – 2, 122, 129
Marciano, A. xxxii
Marshall, A. 29, 39, 73
Marx, K. 27, 92
Masini, F. 30, 32
Mauss, M. 131
McClelland, G.H. 130
McCloskey, D. 32, 134, 135
McLure, M. 31
McPherson, M.S. 135
Meacci, F. 134
Medema, S. xxxii, 129
Medici 52
Michels, R. 6
Mill, J.S. 29, 31, 113
Mises, L.v. 23
Miyazaki, H. xxxiv
Mongin, P. 12
Montesano, A. 12, 136
More, T. 61
Morelli, U. 32
Mornati, F. 32
Muniesa, F. 134
Murphy, L. 136
Musgrave, R.A. xxxii, 130
Myrdal, K.G. xxxi, 126
Nagel, T. 136
Napoleon I 41, 55
Neves, V. 30
Oates, W.E. 132
Oddenino, A. 32
Offutt, S. 135
Pantaleoni, M. 1, 2, 31, 38, 47, 100
Paradiso, M. 130, 132
Pareto, V. xv, xxxiii, 1, 2, 5, 9, 11 – 12,
14 – 17, 19, 23, 26 – 7, 29 – 32, 38 – 42, 48,
71, 73 – 4, 118, 119, 122 – 5, 130, 136
Pascal, B. 91, 127 – 8
Passerin d’Entrèves, A. x, xix, xxvi,
xxvii, xxxi, 8, 23, 28, 31, 127
Peacock, A.T. xxxii
Peano, G. 136
Peil, J. 31
Periclean 22, 79, 101 – 2
Persson, T. 129
Pettit, P. 129
Philip of Macedonia xvii, 67 – 8, 79
Review Copy Only - Not for Redistribution
Paolo Silvestri - University of Turin - 4/24/17
Index 155
Pico della Mirandola, G. 135
Pierce, C.S. 136
Pigou, A.C. 133
Plato 70
Portinaro, P.P. xxxii
Prato, G. 52, 65
Putnam, H. 126, 136
Puviani, A. 65, 103, 132
Quadrio Curzio, A. 32
Reviglio, F. 129
Ricardo, D. xvi, 15, 42, 73 – 4
Riles, A. xxxiv
Robbins, L. vii, xix, xxv, xxix, 6 – 7, 9, 26,
29, 30, 122, 127
Romano, R. 32
Romeo, R. xxxii, 18
Röpke, W. xxi, xxxi, 23, 28
Ross, D. xxxii
Rotondi, C. 32
Samuels, W.J. 32
Sandmo, A. 130
Scarantino, A. 30
Schelling, T.C. 132
Schulze, G. xxxiv
Schulze, W.D. 130
Schumpeter, J.A. xxxi, 18, 32
Seligman, E. 20
Sensini, G. 14, 31
Silvestri, P. xxxi, 5, 11 – 14, 29, 30, 32 – 3,
100 – 1, 113, 129, 130 – 1, 134 – 6
Siu, L. 134
Smart, W. xxvii, xxviii
Smith, A. xxviii, 15, 134
Soddu, P. xxxii, xxxiii
Solari, G. x, xii, xix – xxii, xxv, xxxi, 19,
28, 95, 100, 102 – 4, 120
Stiglitz, J.E. 135
Su, H.C. 31, 136
Sully (Maximilien de Béthune, Duke of )
51 – 2
Tabellini, G. 129
Tomatis, F. xxxi
Torgler, B. 130
Vailati, G. 15, 31, 124 – 5, 135 – 6
Vanberg, V. xxxiv
van de Laar, E. 31
Vromen, J. xxxii
Wagner, R.E. xxxii, 129
Walras, L. xv – xvi, 14, 38, 39,
40 – 2, 73 – 4
Walsh, V. 31, 136
Walzer, M. 29
Way, C. xxxiv
Weber, M. xxxi, 7, 106
Weston, S. 31
Wicksell, K. 22
Wicksteed, P.H. 8
Winch, D. 134
Witzum, A. 30
Ypi, L. xxxiv
Yuengert, A. 31
Review Copy Only - Not for Redistribution
Paolo Silvestri - University of Turin - 4/24/17
Review Copy Only - Not for Redistribution
Paolo Silvestri - University of Turin - 4/24/17
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
Public service is a calling distinct from academic education and research or business pursuits. For the career federal economist, the imperative to serve the public interest in a complex political setting introduces the potential for ethical dilemmas unique to government. Although the rewards of public service are considerable, the economist recognizes the possible tension between political goals and interests and the economist’s concern for professional independence and objectivity. Such friction with politics may on occasion result in suppression or alteration of results or analysis, direction to produce support for decisions already taken, and disagreement over policy decisions. To deal thoughtfully with these challenges, federal economists should be better prepared to think explicitly about ethics, have appeal to an external ethical standard, and advocate for the creation of legitimate internal government dialogue on ethics.
Mauro Fasiani's scholarly achievement still does not occupy its proper place in scientific debate, either in Italy or abroad. Thus, the enhancement of the scientific figure of Mauro Fasiani presents a very significant scientific interest, in order to finally put into perspective his contribution to the evolution of the theory of public finance not only in the Italian tradition in Public Finance but in the international context also. To that end the present paper is directed, within the limits that the aim is not to discuss Fasiani's scientific thought, but only to draw it to the attention of international scholars by making known the content of his work. JEL CODE: B13, B31, H1, H12, H21, H22, H24, H25, H26, H31, H32, H42, H43, H44, H50, H89
Il manuale offre una trattazione completa della scienza delle finanze, sotto il profilo sia degli strumenti teorici, sia dell’esposizione critica delle istituzioni di finanza pubblica del nostro paese. Questa nuova edizione tiene conto delle numerose modifiche intervenute nell’ultimo quadriennio nel processo di bilancio, nel sistema tributario, nel federalismo fiscale, nel Patto di stabilità, nelle politiche di welfare e di regolamentazione. Indice Prefazione all’ottava edizione. - I. Le ragioni dell’intervento pubblico, di P. Bosi. - II. La finanza pubblica in Italia, il Bilancio dello Stato e la Legge di bilancio, di P. Bosi e P. Silvestri. - III. Teoria dell’imposta, di P. Bosi e M.C. Guerra. - IV. La teoria del debito pubblico, di P. Bosi. - V. Il decentramento fiscale, di P. Bosi e M.C. Guerra. - VI. La politica fiscale nell’Unione economica e monetaria, di P. Bosi. - VII. Servizi di pubblica utilità e politiche per la concorrenza, di P. Bosi. - VIII. La spesa per il welfare state, di P. Bosi, M. Baldini, E. Caruso, C. Mazzaferro, P. Silvestri e S. Toso. - Indice analitico.