Search results

The modern revival of “Austrian economics” dates to the South Royalton conference of 1974 (Vaughn, 1994, pp. 103–111). At that time, neoclassical orthodoxy excluded evolutionary concepts. It was, in Ludwig Lachmann’s memorable phrase, “late classical formalism” (1977, p. 35). Opposition to neoclassical orthodoxy was part of the definition of Austrian economics. It formed part of our identity. Today it is no longer clear what “orthodoxy” is or whether current mainstream economics is “neoclassical” at all (Colander et al., 2004). One of the more salient changes in mainstream economics over the last 30 years is the introduction of evolutionary ideas. Mainstream economics is rich with evolutionary concepts. Evolutionary game theory, for example, is certainly a part of today’s standard toolbox. Thirty years ago, it did not even exist.¹ Some of the evolutionary ideas entering mainstream economics are similar or identical to ideas from the Austrian tradition. In this situation, it is no longer clear what the Austrian differentiae are. I hope this volume will help to sort out some of the issues relating to Austrian economics and one group of evolutionary ideas, namely, those of evolutionary psychology.

The methodological individualism and subjectivism of the Austrian tradition in economics is often associated with a methodological dualism, i.e. the claim that the nature of its subject matter, namely purposeful and intentional human action, requires economics to adopt a methodology that is fundamentally different from the causal explanatory approach of the natural sciences. This paper critically examines this claim and advocates an alternative, explicitly naturalistic and empiricist outlook at human action, exemplified, in particular, by the research program of evolutionary psychology. It is argued that, within the Austrian tradition, a decidedly naturalistic approach to subjectivism can be found in F. A. Hayek’s work.

Human dignity is a crucial concept in international and domestic human rights law. It is understood to be the foundation of human rights, and while we know what human rights are, the nature, content, and grounds of human dignity remain unclear. The aim of this chapter is to propose scientific grounds for human dignity. In this context, the author will explore contemporary evolutionary biology and evolutionary psychology, where it is claimed that human nature is constituted by tendencies to cooperate (Tomasello, 2009), or under a different formulation, by narrow altruism and imperfect prudence (Załuski, 2009). Evolutionary psychology holds that we have basic tendencies to cooperate with one another and to behave altruistically in order to achieve a common good. This means that our basic evolutionary default and scientifically proven mode of being are optimistic and can be labelled as morally good. The author argues that this human nature constitutes scientific grounds for human dignity. The author’s argument holds that since human dignity comprises the inherent worth of every human being, this positive moral fact about the scientifically understood human nature is human dignity. The author then present this issue within two broader philosophical frameworks of analytic philosophy – namely, naturalism (especially methodological naturalism) and metaphysical realism. Following this, the author contends that references to natural sciences in debates on the foundations of human dignity and human rights argue against the strongest objection to human rights – the objection of Western ethnocentrism.

Evolutionary psychology² starts from two simple assumptions: The human mind is best understood not as a general purpose computer but as a set of specialized software modules, each designed to deal with a particular subset of problems. Those programs have been designed by Darwinian evolution to produce reproductive success in our environment of evolutionary adaptiveness – the hunter-gatherer environment in which our species spent most of its species history.Researchers in evolutionary psychology, starting with these assumptions, have generated and tested predictions ranging from differences in male and female special abilities to the timing of morning sickness.

Purpose – This chapter discusses the increased acceptance of biopolitical research by mainstream political science and examines the potential causes. It demonstrates that the changing status of biopolitics is part of a more general pattern in academia, where biological explanations of social phenomena are increasingly viewed as acceptable and even necessary.

Design/methodology/approach – A brief review of the history of the literature of biopolitics with a content analysis of the three leading general-readership journals of political science and other measures of activity in biopolitics.

Findings – Political scientists until recently have not been receptive to the arguments advanced by proponents of biopolitics, but this resistance is weakening. This case for a more biologically oriented political science is more tenable now in part because of the groundwork done by the early generation of biopolitics scholars but mainly because of changing circumstances.

Institutional economics at the societal level focuses on the examination of interpersonal and impersonal economic, political and social institutions within a given polity and how such institutions might change and evolve over time. Such examination is critical to both international business scholars and practitioners if they are to successfully navigate variations in the rules of the game in international trade and commerce. Whilst institutional economics offers an immense body of literature on institutions, it offers surprisingly few theoretical or conceptual tools for empirical analysis. This chapter discusses five extant frameworks and proposes an ontological theoretical framework developed from interdisciplinary sources to underpin extant frameworks and thereby guide international business researchers in designing more effective research instruments for examining institutional change across and between cultures.

Purpose – Description of the effects of the revolution in neuroscience and other areas of biology that can help to explain the roots of some portion of violent crime. The chapter reconsiders the role of brain chemistry in social behavior and violent behavior. To illustrate the interdisciplinary complexities entailed when linking brain chemistry to policy decisions concerning violent crime, this analysis has four main stages: first, why might SiFs (H2SiF6 and Na2SiF6, jointly called “silicofluorides” or SiFs) be dangerous? Second, what biochemical effects of SiF could have toxic consequences for humans? Third, on this basis a research hypothesis predicts children in communities using SiF should have increased uptake of lead from environmental sources and higher rates of behavioral dysfunctions known to be caused by lead neurotoxicity.

Design/methodology/approach – To illustrate the implications of the new issues involved, this chapter focuses on a public policy that inadvertently seems to increase rates of violent crime. Since violent behavior is one of the effects of lead neurotoxicity, the hypothesis is tested using multiple sources of data including rates of violent crime studied using a variety of multivariate statistical techniques (including analysis of variance, multiple regression, and stepwise regression).

Findings – Various data sources point to greater violence among individuals with greater exposure to SiFs.

Originality/value – Testing hypotheses linking neurotoxins to violent behavior reveals the generally unsuspected value of analyzing human social behavior and public policy from the perspective of evolutionary psychology.

This book brings together chapters that present a range of new directions in theories, models and ideas related to information behaviour. The aim of the book has been to draw out and examine new directions in information behaviour research. Information behaviour is conceptualized as complex human information-related processes that are embedded within an individual's everyday social and life processes with evolutionary and developmental foundations. Information behaviour is an important part of the human condition and critical to the development of new approaches to the design of Web and information retrieval (IR) systems. Information behaviour studies are growing as an interdisciplinary area of research that includes studies from information science, social and evolutionary psychology and other behavioural disciplines.