Cette thèse interroge l’unité de l’économie politique classique en montrant qu’à partir d'une conception de l’autonomie de l’économie, plusieurs articulations de la théorie des prix et d’une «science du législateur» sont possibles. Adam Smith se démarque de François Quesnay et David Ricardo sur ce point. Alors que ces auteurs sont souvent lus à travers le seul prisme de la théorie des prix et donc inclus dans un même projet, nous verrons notamment que Dugald Stewart joua un rôle de premier plan dans le développement d’une lignée qui fût bâtie en excluant Smith. A l’aune des conceptions de l’autonomie de chacun, nous montrons dans une première partie que les concepts de la théorie des prix, notamment la règle de répartition et le processus de circulation, traduisent l’encastrement de l’économie dans une totalité sociale. Or, si Quesnay, Stewart et Ricardo ont chacun pu contribuer à la théorie classique, les analyses de Smith ne respectent pas ses critères de cohérence logique et semblent mener dans l’impasse. Il s’agit en réalité de la marque d’un projet alternatif, mis à jour dans la seconde partie. Quesnay, Stewart et Ricardo présupposent que l’économie est sujette à un ordre qu’il convient de réaliser par la concurrence, mais se distinguent quant aux institutions nécessaires pour ce faire. En revanche, Smith suppose que le législateur n’est pas contraint par des mécanismes économiques. En effet, l’économie n'est pour lui que la modalité d'un lien social général, nécessitant un arbitrage entre rapports sociaux agonistiques. / This thesis aims at questioning the homogeneity of classical political economy by showing that alternative links between price theory and the science of a legislator may be endorsed, depending on what conception of the autonomy of the economic domain is retained. In this respect, Adam Smith departs from François Quesnay and David Ricardo. While these authors are often compared on the sole ground of price theory, and thereby subsumed under a common framework, Dugald Stewart played a prominent role in the development of a trend in the history of ideas which actually excluded Smith from the start. In the light of the author’ understanding of the autonomy of the economy, the first part of this thesis shows that key concepts of classical price theory, among which the rule of distribtuion orthe circulation of commodities, reflect the fact that the economy is embedded in society considered as a whole. Yet, while Quesnay, Stewart and Ricardo did contribute to classical theory in this respect, Smith's analyses do not fit its logical requirements and seem to represent a deadlock.These are however the sign of an alternative project, dealt within the second part of the thesis. Quesnay, Stewart and Ricardo presuppose that the economy is subject to an overall order which ought to be realised thanks to market competition, although they disagree as to what formof institution is best suited to do so. On the contrary, Smith presupposes that the legislator is not impeded by any economic mechanism, since the economy are only a dimension of social interactions, whereby conflicting interests need to be counterbalanced.

This dissertation aims to contrast the differences between Montesquieu¡¦s and Quesnay¡¦s thoughts of China Despotism theory, to analyze the methodology and epistemology used by the two scholars to demonstrate and observe traditional China despotism, and, to expound and examine the description of traditional China despotism in Montesquieu¡¦s and Quesnay¡¦s thoughts. Montesquieu was a rare one among Enlightenment philosophers who profoundly discussed China Despotism in the eighteenth century. In the elaboration of Montesquieu¡¦s China Despotism, there were lots of contradictions in De L'espirt Des Lois. Traditional China government was depreciated by him. From the empirical induce methodology, positivism epistemology and ontology¡¦s point of view, this dissertation tries to deeply analyze and research Montesquieu¡¥s China Despotism. At the time, there were also some Enlightenment Philosophers who have a different view of China Despotism. The representative was a Physiocrat ¡V Francois Quesnay. In his Le Despotisme De La Chine, he marked traditional China government positively. Quesnay, who developed his view based on the same empirical facts about traditional China according to the eighteenth century¡¦s Jesuits, travelers and businessmen and with the same natural science methodology, had totally different views and thoughts about China Despotism from Montesquieu. This dissertation has a detailed study and review on these differences. Questions will be explored in this dissertation are as below. Did the natural science methodology and epistemology of Montesquieu¡¦s and Quesnay¡¦s China Despotism strengthen the judgment of how they valued traditional China government? Were there pre-judgments in their so-called neutral and objective denouncement about the way they researched China Despotism in the empirical induce methodology and epistemology? Were Montesquieu¡¦s and Quesnay¡¦s judgments about China Depotism enhanced by the natural science methodology and epistemology a kind of western centralism? Did they, in the name of neutral and objective empirical induce methodology and epistemology that could not reason non-western value, refuse and devaluate other non-western value? This dissertation has a deeply reflection on these from the ¡§paradigm¡¨ and ¡§incommensurable¡¨ methodological concepts of Thomas S. Kuhn¡¦s. If Montesquieu¡¦s China Despotism was the main point of western culture, was the way Quesnay observed traditional China government presenting a different value in the west culture and there were still some admiring this kind of value? Was this kind of evaluation neglected by recent Chinese intellects? This is a serious problem worthy of reconsideration and reflection. Keywords: Montesquieu, François Quesnay, Physiocracy, Despotism, enlightened despotism, China Despotism, natural science methodology, theory laden, Thomas S. Kuhn, paradigm, incommensurable