Search results
1 – 10 of 28Political economies evolve institutionally and technologically over time. This means that to understand evolutionary political economy one must understand the nature of the…
Abstract
Political economies evolve institutionally and technologically over time. This means that to understand evolutionary political economy one must understand the nature of the evolutionary process in its full complexity. From the time of Darwin and Spencer natural selection has been seen as the foundation of evolution. This view has remained even as views of how evolution operates more broadly have changed. An issue that some have viewed as an aspect of evolution that natural selection may not fully explain is that of emergence of higher order structures, with this aspect having been associated with the idea of emergence. In recent decades it has been argued that self-organization dynamics may explain such emergence, with this being argued to be constrained, if not overshadowed, by natural selection. Just as the balance between these aspects is debated within organic evolutionary theory, it also arises in the evolution of political economy, as between such examples of self-organizing emergence as the Mengerian analysis of the appearance of commodity money in primitive societies and the natural selection that operates in the competition between firms in markets.
Details
Keywords
Albert Somit and Steven A. Peterson
Biopolitics is not altogether a felicitous term used to describe the approach of those political scientists who use biological concepts, with neo-Darwinian evolutionary theory at…
Abstract
Biopolitics is not altogether a felicitous term used to describe the approach of those political scientists who use biological concepts, with neo-Darwinian evolutionary theory at the center, and biological research techniques to study, explain, predict, and sometimes even to prescribe political phenomena.
This chapter explores the ways in which cybernetics influenced the works of F. A. Hayek from the late 1940s onward. It shows that the concept of negative feedback, borrowed from…
Abstract
This chapter explores the ways in which cybernetics influenced the works of F. A. Hayek from the late 1940s onward. It shows that the concept of negative feedback, borrowed from cybernetics, was central to Hayek’s attempt to explain the principle of the emergence of human purposive behavior. Next, the chapter discusses Hayek’s later uses of cybernetic ideas in his works on the spontaneous formation of social orders. Finally, Hayek’s view on the appropriate scope of the use of cybernetics is considered.
Details
Keywords
Friedrich Hayek, Ludwig von Mises, Ludwig Lachmann and George Shackle upheld that investigations of the causes of purposes, preferences, beliefs or behaviors by the social…
Abstract
Friedrich Hayek, Ludwig von Mises, Ludwig Lachmann and George Shackle upheld that investigations of the causes of purposes, preferences, beliefs or behaviors by the social scientist were unwarranted. Shackle proposed that human agency is an “uncaused cause.” Others admitted that human volitions and actions are caused, but ruled out explanations of these causes from social science. By considering Darwinian insights from modern evolutionary psychology, this essay criticizes the view that causal investigations of human volitions and actions are beyond social science. These insights also point to the role of habit and instinct in human behavior.
In much of philosophy and social theory since classical antiquity, human belief and reason have been placed in the driving seat of individual action. In particular, social theory…
Abstract
In much of philosophy and social theory since classical antiquity, human belief and reason have been placed in the driving seat of individual action. In particular, social theory has often taken it for granted, or even by definition, that action is motivated by reasons based on beliefs. In contrast, a minority has criticized the adoption of this ‘folk psychology’ that explains human action wholly in such ‘mind first’ terms. Critics point out that such explanations are a mere gloss on a much more complex neurophysiological reality. These dualistic and ‘mind-first’ explanations of human behavior are unable to explain adequately such phenomena as sleep, memory, learning, mental illness, or the effects of chemicals or drugs on our perceptions or actions (Bunge, 1980; Churchland, 1984, 1989; Churchland, 1986; Rosenberg, 1995, 1998; Kilpinen, 2000).
Albert Somit and Steven A. Peterson
Purpose – This chapter introduces the volume to the reader and provides a simple case study of the value of evolutionary theory for public policy.Design/methodology/approach – The…
Abstract
Purpose – This chapter introduces the volume to the reader and provides a simple case study of the value of evolutionary theory for public policy.
Design/methodology/approach – The scope of this chapter is to lay out a map of the rest of the volume for the reader, provide an explanation of the subject of biopolicy, and use a case study analysis to illustrate the approach adopted in this book.
Findings – While this chapter is at one level a simple introduction, at another level it tries to orient to reader to the remainder of the larger work. The one case study illustrates an approach using evolutionary theory to examine policy implications of knowledge from the life sciences.
Details