05/28/2026
After 250 years, why still read Adam Smith?
Kenneth Boulding answers this precise question in his article, "After Samuelson, Who Needs Adam Smith?" He argues that Smith is not just a historical figure, but part of our extended present. The questions Smith raised about development, institutions, jurisprudence, and the moral foundations of markets are still live questions.
As Boulding notes: "One can still go back to Adam Smith even after many rereadings and find insights which one has never noticed before and which may have a marked impact on one's own thought. [...] The principle seems to me pretty clear that as long as intellectual evolutionary potential remains yet undeveloped in the early writers, the modern writers are a complement rather than a substitute; that is, we need both Samuelson and Adam Smith."
For more on this topic, check out:
π Kenneth Boulding's article, "After Samuelson, Who Needs Adam Smith?" https://loom.ly/sYjqfIo
π Peter Boettke's article, "Kenneth Boulding as an enchanting, encouraging and engaging professor" https://loom.ly/wu780bo