Cited by 232Philosophical Ethics and TheoryDavid Hume StudiesHistorical Economic and Legal Thought

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

The Impartial Spectator

Raphael, D. D.·2007·Oxford University Press eBooks

Abstract

This advance is shown especially in Smith's fastening upon the impartiality of the judging spectator. The notion of the impartial spectator is developed in Smith's attention to judgements about one's own action, so that it becomes an explanation of conscience.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199213337.001.0001

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Raphael, D. D.
Corresponding author
Raphael, D. D.
Venue
Oxford University Press eBooks
Published
2007-01-25
Pages
32-42
OpenAlex
W2488837078
Cited by
232
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 26 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 27 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 16 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 13 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 9
FWCI
23.63
Type
book
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Oxford University Press eBooks (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Philosophical Ethics and Theory
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › David Hume Studies
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Historical Economic and Legal Thought
Keywords
Adam Smith, impartial spectator, moral judgment, self-judgment, conscience, moral sentiments

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review