Quote Originally Posted by hellothere View Post
the reason I ask is that having read some of Wealth of Nations, I tend to agree with the LIE analysis, and maybe the Te focus is why I found it (relatively) enjoyable to read (being Te dual seeking myself, or maybe not). However the subject matter is arguably most suited to a Te/Ni treatment in the first place, so maybe some of what is coming through is a reflection of what he is writing about rather than himself (an alpha NT, being competent in Te and Ni could perhaps give off an gamma NT impression if writing on a gamma NT subject). In contrast, moral philosophy is probably something which is harder to approach in the same manner, so I was wondering (having not read it myself) if (and if so, how) his Te/Ni-ness comes through there as well.
I'm not sure I agree that the subject matter was necessarily Te/Ni. Smith was writing in a complete void of 'economic literature' since he, in many regards, established the field. So he was writing as a moral philosopher, because political economy did not exist as a discipline until he took it up. I think his particular approach demonstrates Te, rather than reflecting the Te nature of the subject. For example, I don't think Marx took a Te approach, and he was arguably also a Classical economist, and the neoclassical approach is certainly not Te driven (I would argue that it is Ti + Ne).

In 'Wealth of Nations', Smith wrote: "In the progress of society, philosophy or speculation becomes, like every other employment, the principal or sole trade of a particular class of citizens. Like every other employment too, it is subdivided into a great number of different branches, each of which affords occupation to a peculiar tribe or class of philosophers; and this subdivision of employment in philosophy...improves dexterity and saves time." I think that depicts his Te approach, in his very definition of economics as a new field of enquiry. (So while I'm not claiming he created 'economics', he did found it as a profession.) I guess what I'm trying to say is that you're calling it a gamma NT field, and I'm saying that he made the field, so if you're seeing it as gamma NT, that should be a stronger indicator that he too is gamma NT.

In any case, the 'Theory of Moral Sentiments' is available in its entirety online: http://www.adamsmith.org/smith/tms/tms-index.htm I personally don't see it as being all that alien or different to 'Wealth of Nations'. I think his philosophical approach was consistent through most of his writing.