Why have scholars debated whether Adam Smith’s two major books conflict with each other?

Scholars have long debated whether Adam Smith’s The Theory of Moral Sentiments and The Wealth of Nations are complementary or in conflict. This discussion, often referred to as the "Adam Smith Problem," arises from a perceived tension between the two works.1

The debate centers on two primary interpretations:

• The Conflict Perspective: Critics point to a seeming clash between the focus on social morality, sympathy, and the "impartial spectator" found in The Theory of Moral Sentiments and the largely amoral, self-interested explication of the economic system presented in The Wealth of Nations.1
• The Complementary Perspective: Conversely, some scholars argue that the two works are consistent. In this view, The Theory of Moral Sentiments provides the psychological foundation for Smith’s later work, explaining how individuals are socialized to become the market-oriented actors who drive the economic system described in The Wealth of Nations.1

Ultimately, Smith himself bridged these themes by observing in both books that self-seeking individuals are often led by an "invisible hand" to advance the common good without intending to do so.1