Anarrya SEN PIERO SRAFFA: A STUDENT'S PERSPECTIVE" 1. THE ECONOMIST AND THE PHILOSOPHER Piero Sraffa, who died twenty years ago, not only had an amazingly orderly and original mind, he has also been extraordinarily influential Srafia published remarkably litle, but significantly swayed discussions and debates in contemporary economics and in philosophy®. In addi- tion to the important contributions Sraffa made to the discussion of contemporary politics in Italy and elsewhere, Sraffa’s intellectual impact includes (1) several foundational explorations in economic theory (par- ticularly the understanding of value, distribution, and capital)", (2) a radical modification of the history of economic thought, especially in the interpretation of the works of David Ricardo, and (3) playing a critical role in a pivotally significant development in modern philosophy, namely Ludwig Wittgenstein’s momentous shift from his early position "0 This is w revised version of a paper presented at Piero Staffs Convegno Internazion ale, arranged by the Accademia Nazionale det Lineei, held on M-12 February 2003, in Rome. A shocter essay on Sella Graf, Wittgenstoix and Gramsci), which draws on this paper, is published in «The Journal of Economic Literature» (Sex 2003). For helpful discus sions and suggestion over the years, I am most grateful to Nick Denyes, Pirangslo Gare nani, Geoff Harcourt, Heinz Kurz, Tony Lawson, Brian McGuinness, Hilary Putnam, Emma Rothschild, Luigi Spavents, Vivian’ Walsh, and Stefano Zamagri und also to Jonathan Sevth who is in charge of the Stalls papers in’the Wren Library in Tiinity College, Cambridge. ) Books on Stuffs life and contributions include Sresnws 1977, 1988, RoNcACuA 1978; Porex 1987; Scirocp 1989; Buxzanway-Scusrown 1990; Cozz-Manceuowarm 2000; Kunz 2000; De Vivo 2003; among others, ‘0 See StAsPA 1925, 1926, 1951, 1960. On the significance of these contributions, see Ganccnusi 1960, 1970, 1998; Pasisern: 1966, 1979, 1988; Hancovar 1972; Rovexctin 1978, 1999; Kato 1984, 1985; Earwett-Panico 1987; Sasuetson 1987, 2000a, 2000b; ScHsFOLD 1889, 1996, Srios Lavi! 1990; EarwaLL-Muaare-Newwax 1990; Kurz 1990, 2000; among, other writings See Szasra 1951, introducing Ricasoo 1951-1973.== in Tractatus Logico Pilosopbicus to the later Philosophical Investigations®, which profoundly changed the nature of twentieth-century philosophy. The “economist Sraffa” is often separated out from his other roles This is partly because Sraffa was professionally an economist, but also because his impact on philosophy was almost entirely through his influ ence on Wittgenstein. Indeed, other than a joint essay he wrote with John Maynard Keynes, which took the form of an “introduction” to the republication of an anonymously published monograph by David Hume (Keynes-Sraffa 1938), Sraffa published litde in philosophy, though there ae significant unpublished notes of his on philosophical subjects. In contrast, Sraffa published a number of writings in economics, and even though he could not be described as having been a prolific writer, each of his economic publications received enormous attention. In fact, Sraffa’s writings led to a new school of thought in economic theory and also initiated major re-examinations and substantive contro versies in contemporary economics. Indeed, Sraffa’s economic contribu: tions have been a veritable battlefield among economists of different persuasions. They are tremendously admired by many economists and plentiful invoked'®. And yet other economists have argued that there is nothing much of substance in his writings, claiming that the proposi tions he presented were either wrong or mere duplication of what other economists had sid already. Still other commentators, such as Paul Sam- uclson, have seen great insight in some of Sraffa’s economic work, but litde merit in others (and have also identified some alleged “errors”)”. ‘The temptation to examine “the economist Sraffa” separately — attacking or defending ot emulating him — has been understandably strong. And yet there is, I would argue, much to be gained from seeing Sraffa’s diferent contributions together, not just because they emanated. from the same mind, but also because there are distinct links between his thoughts in different fields. This, in a small way, is what T will ty to do in this essay. I shall be particularly concerned with the light that Sraff’s philosophical outlook, broadly understood, throws on the nature of his economic investigs- tions. I must also examine Sraffas interactions with Wittgenstein, whom Sraffa strongly influenced, in the light of his relationship with Antonio ©) See Wirtcensteny 1921, 1951, 1958 (© T have been told hat Srafa is the most cited author in the widely used New Pal se ney of comomes (aren McaeNenus 198), bt I hae nx checked hs 1 See SaMeLsow 1987, 2000s, 2000b, See also Hanoy 1982,3 Gramsci, the Marxist theorist, who had a strong influence on Sraffa. These dual relations also provide an opportunity to comment briefly on an indirect “Gramsci connection” in the transformation of “early Wit- tgenstein” into “later Wittgenstein”. The philosophical issues that led to interactions between Gramsci, Sraffa and Wittgenstein have significance both within philosophy and for their impact on Sraffa’s economics. 2. Tue Quivtessentia Pepacocue To pay attention to the interdependence between Sralfa’s economics and his philosophy will demand a broader approach than is typically followed in the literature on him, which tends to concentrate specifically — and almost exclusively — on his economic contributions". I begin, however, with broadening the discussion even further, by bringing in cone “other” Sraffa I have not yet mentioned, namely Sraffa the teacher, whom I was privileged to know. ‘As a new undergraduate at Trinity College, Cambridge, I first met Piero Srafia in the early October in 1953 {I had got off a ship from India the week before). When I went to his room in Nevile’s Court of Trinity College, he was having his breakfast, and he informed me that it was much 100 early (it was, I think, around ten o'clock in the morn- ing), but T would be very welcome in half an hour or so, when indeed I punctually returned, I was struck immediately not only by Sraffa's easy manners and friendly disposition, but also by his dedication in helping students to understand the world around them. This included the complexities of Cambridge University with its odd “college system” and feuding academic dons (especially in the Faculty of Economics). He had, by then, been in Cambridge for twenty-six years having left Ttaly under fascist rule in September 1927), and was very much a pillar of the Establishment in the University and in my college. But Sraffa recollected, with evident amusement, his difficulties in set- ling into Cambridge a quarter of a century earlier. “Even when @ young boy raises his hand and commands cars to stop, they all stop: why are they so instruction-obedient in England?*. I knew that my education with Sraffa was just beginning: my new teacher was encouraging me to ask unusual questions, That encouragement, which became more and ' See, however, Davis 1993, 2002; Coares 1996, Atsaxt 1998; Natpt 2000, and also Sex 2003.