▸ HEAD-TO-HEAD
ADAM SMITH VS FRANCIS HUTCHESON
Adam Smith
1723–1790
What is is not what must be.
Francis Hutcheson
1694–1746
What is is not what must be.
▸ WHERE THEY SHARPLY DISAGREED
The three dimensions on which Adam Smith and Francis Hutcheson are farthest apart on Mull's 0–10 scale.
- Practical OrientationΔ 2 / 10Adam Smith: 7/10Francis Hutcheson: 9/10
somewhat (2/10): Francis Hutcheson is oriented toward what helps a life go well in practice; Adam Smith foregrounds other priorities.
- Trust in ReasonΔ 1 / 10Adam Smith: 6/10Francis Hutcheson: 5/10
somewhat (1/10): Adam Smith trusts reasoned argument more strongly than Francis Hutcheson does.
- Trust in ExperienceΔ 1 / 10Adam Smith: 7/10Francis Hutcheson: 8/10
somewhat (1/10): Francis Hutcheson grounds knowing in lived experience; Adam Smith weights other sources of evidence more.
▸ WHERE THEY OVERLAPPED
Where the gap is smallest — both with meaningful presence on the dimension (not "neither cared").
- Universalist Impulsegap 0 / 10Adam Smith: 6/10Francis Hutcheson: 6/10
Both register moderate universalist impulse.
- Embodied Sensibilitygap 0 / 10Adam Smith: 5/10Francis Hutcheson: 5/10
Both register moderate embodied sensibility.
- Theoretical Drivegap 0 / 10Adam Smith: 6/10Francis Hutcheson: 6/10
Both register moderate theoretical drive.
▸ ALL 16 DIMENSIONS
The full vector comparison. Bars show their 0–10 scores side-by-side.
- Ascetic TendencyΔ 0
- Communal EmbeddednessΔ 1
- Embodied SensibilityΔ 0
- Mystical ReceptivityΔ 0
- Practical OrientationΔ 2
- Reverence for TraditionΔ 0
- Self as IllusionΔ 0
- Skeptical ReflexΔ 0
- Sovereign SelfΔ 0
- Theoretical DriveΔ 0
- Trust in ExperienceΔ 1
- Trust in ReasonΔ 1
- Tragic VisionΔ 0
- Universalist ImpulseΔ 0
- Vital AffirmationΔ 0
- Will to PowerΔ 0
◀ ADAM SMITHFRANCIS HUTCHESON ▶
▶ What to do next