Search results

A collection of essays by a social economist seeking to balance economics as a science of means with the values deemed necessary to man′s finding the good life and society enduring as a civilized instrumentality. Looks for authority to great men of the past and to today′s moral philosopher: man is an ethical animal. The 13 essays are: 1. Evolutionary Economics: The End of It All? which challenges the view that Darwinism destroyed belief in a universe of purpose and design; 2. Schmoller′s Political Economy: Its Psychic, Moral and Legal Foundations, which centres on the belief that time‐honoured ethical values prevail in an economy formed by ties of common sentiment, ideas, customs and laws; 3. Adam Smith by Gustav von Schmoller – Schmoller rejects Smith′s natural law and sees him as simply spreading the message of Calvinism; 4. Pierre‐Joseph Proudhon, Socialist – Karl Marx, Communist: A Comparison; 5. Marxism and the Instauration of Man, which raises the question for Marx: is the flowering of the new man in Communist society the ultimate end to the dialectical movement of history?; 6. Ethical Progress and Economic Growth in Western Civilization; 7. Ethical Principles in American Society: An Appraisal; 8. The Ugent Need for a Consensus on Moral Values, which focuses on the real dangers inherent in there being no consensus on moral values; 9. Human Resources and the Good Society – man is not to be treated as an economic resource; man′s moral and material wellbeing is the goal; 10. The Social Economist on the Modern Dilemma: Ethical Dwarfs and Nuclear Giants, which argues that it is imperative to distinguish good from evil and to act accordingly: existentialism, situation ethics and evolutionary ethics savour of nihilism; 11. Ethical Principles: The Economist′s Quandary, which is the difficulty of balancing the claims of disinterested science and of the urge to better the human condition; 12. The Role of Government in the Advancement of Cultural Values, which discusses censorship and the funding of art against the background of the US Helms Amendment; 13. Man at the Crossroads draws earlier themes together; the author makes the case for rejecting determinism and the “operant conditioning” of the Skinner school in favour of the moral progress of autonomous man through adherence to traditional ethical values.

“Communism has never concealed the fact that it rejects all absolute concepts of morality. It scoffs at any consideration of “good” and “evil” as indisputable categories. Communism considers morality to be relative, to be a class matter… It has infected the whole world with the belief in the relativity of good and evil.” Aleksandr I. Solzhenitsyn, Warning to the West, 1975.

George Herbert Mead is an exemplary figure in sociology, and is central to sociological conceptions of the self and social action. However, other important aspects of Mead's thought have been largely neglected, including his remarkably sophisticated and sociological theory of scientific knowledge. Traditional accounts of the sociology of science identify Thomas Kuhn, and his predecessor, Ludwig Fleck, as pioneers in the social analysis of scientific knowledge, allowing the modern constructionist school of science studies to emerge. This article challenges this history by showing Mead's awareness of the sociological aspects of scientific knowledge in papers that predate both Kuhn and Fleck. Finally, Mead's position attempts to avoid sociological relativism, and offers instead a pragmatist foundation to approach the study of science.

This study investigates the correlation between economic development and scientific knowledge production indicators in the BRICS countries from 2000 to 2020, highlighting the importance of human resources, natural resources, and innovation. Addressing a gap in the existing literature, this study aims to contribute significantly to understanding this relationship.

Employing a descriptive statistical approach, this study utilizes GDP and per capita income as economic indicators and scientific data from WoS and SCOPUS databases, focusing on scientific document production and citations per document.

The analysis reveals a strong correlation between economic development and scientific performance within the BRICS nations during the specified period. It emphasizes the interdependence of economic progress and scientific prowess, underscoring that they cannot be considered independently.

However, limitations exist, notably the reliance on specific databases that might not cover the entire scientific output and the inability to capture all factors influencing economic and scientific development.

Understanding this interdependence has crucial originality. Policymakers and stakeholders in BRICS countries can leverage these insights to prioritize investments in human capital development and scientific research. This approach can foster sustainable economic growth by reducing reliance on natural resources.

This paper aims to demonstrating that the former new institutional theory of isomorphism and decoupling cannot be extended, modified or refuted as it is a closed theory. By analyzing the structure of this former version of institutional theory and its numerous modern competitors (institutional entrepreneurship, institutional work and institutional logics theories) it is argued that these alternative theories demonstrate even less explanatory and predictive power and do not refute or extend their predecessor. The rise of new organizational theories can have no other effect on classic institutional theory than to limit the domain of its applicability. In turn, there are a number of principles and conditions that future theories should meet to be accepted as progressive advancements.

The paper provides a review of relevant organizational and philosophical literature on theory construction and scientific progress in organizational research and offers a set of principles and demands for those new theories that seek to challenge new institutionalism.

The authors show that the former institutional theory satisfies two main criteria that any scientific theory should conform with following it is useful and falsifiable in term of giving explanations and predictions while, at the same time, clearly specifying what can be observed and what cannot; what can happen and what is not likely to occur. Modern institutional theories cannot demonstrate this quality and they do not satisfy these criteria. Moreover, institutional isomorphism theory is a closed theory, which means it cannot be intervened with changes and modifications and all future theories should develop their theoretical propositions for other domains of applications while they should account for all empirical phenomena that institutional theory successfully explains.

Adopting instrumental view on organizational theories allowed reconstructing the logic and trajectory of organizational research evolution and defends its rationality and progressive nature. It is also outlined how existing dominant theory should be treated and how new theories should challenge its limitations and blind spots and which philosophical and methodological criteria should be met.

In recent years, in keeping with the new emphasis on science as a human activity, a process of inquiry, philosophers of science have begun to pay more attention to the criteria for choosing between competing hypotheses or theories. There is now a widespread tendency to treat the standard criteria of theory appraisal, such as a theory's accuracy, consistency, scope, simplicity, fruitfulness, elegance, etc., not as rules which dictate choice but as values, maxims, norms which influence scientific decision making (Kuhn, 1977). In opposition to those seeking an algorithm of theory choice it is now recognised that there are, inevitably, certain subjective elements in scientific theory appraisal. The standard criteria, while providing the shared basis for choice, not only are imprecise in their meaning and application but, when deployed together, often conflict with one another as, for example, when one theory is more accurate but less simple than another. Thus two scientists fully committed to the same set of standards may, if they interpret these standards differently, or if they attach different weights to different desiderata, reach different conclusions as to the merits of competing theoretical constructs.

A appraises the scientific and technical strength of a region. In order to make the appraisal scientifically, we need an index system and a evaluation model.

In this paper, an index system for evaluation of the scientific and technical strength of provincial region has been presented with grey system theory and Delphi Method. A new evaluation model based on trigonal whitenization weight function is formulated. A positive study with evaluation of the scientific and technical strength of Jiangsu Province is conducted.

It is concluded from the positive study that the scientific and technical strength of Jiangsu Province comes out top in China.

But there are some sticking points that interfere with the scientific and technical strength of Jiangsu Province, such as its shortage of talented person and capital, etc. should be addressed.

It will be helpful to China and other countries.

Application of new evaluation methodology.

The Austrian School of Economics, pioneered in the late nineteenth century by Menger and developed in the twentieth century by Mises and Hayek, is poised to make significant contributions to the methodology, analytics, and social philosophy of economics and political economy in the twenty-first century. But it can only do so if its practitioners accept responsibility to pursue the approach to its logical conclusions with confidence and absence of fear, and with an attitude of open inquiry, acceptance of their own fallibility, and a desire to track truth and offer social understanding. The reason the Austrian school is so well positioned to do this is because (1) it embraces its role as a human science, (2) it does not shy away from public engagement, (3) it takes a humble stance, (4) it seeks to be practical, and (5) there remains so much evolutionary potential to the ideas at the methodological, analytical, and social philosophical level that would challenge the conventional wisdom in economics, political science, sociology, history, law, business, and philosophy. The author explores these five tenants of Austrian economics as a response to the comments on his lead chapter “What Is Still Wrong with the Austrian School of Economics?”