Home > Uncategorized > Complexity and economic laws

Complexity and economic laws

from Maria Alejandra Madi

In the 1960s, Hayek argued that: “in the field of complex phenomena, the term” law “, as well as the concepts of cause and effect, are not applicable”. Regarding “The Theory of Complex Phenomena”, Hayek warned that in the case of complex phenomena, the scientist must give priority to the development of theoretical assumptions, instead of privileging empirical tests. The economist perceives the market system as a complex system in which the coordination process of decentralized individual plans takes place.

According to his approach, cognition and evolution are social phenomena intertwined in a historical process. read more

  1. Norman L. Roth
    August 3, 2021 at 7:54 pm

    Dear Mme. Maria Alejandra,
    I have been greatly influenced by Friedrich Hayek, Ludwig Mises, Friedrich Von Weiser etc. of the “Austrian School”. There Monetary theories still seem a bit strange more than a century down the line: But that is small criticism compared to the vacuous mediocrity & crackpot determinism of so many of their pseudo-scientific attackers of the past century. By way of explanation please consider the following:
    “Case probability is NOT Class probability”.. Ludwig V. Mises: With input from his brother Richard no doubt. Consequently, one cannot simply “add-up, or aggregate along a continuum all the case probability distributions into one great CLASS probability distribution. Because the uncountable case probability distributions {micro } are INTERACTIVE. i.e. They are NOT ‘arithmomorphic’ to use the great Nicolas Georgescu Roegen’s terminology. But there is a GESTALT relationship between the myriad, INTERACTIVE case probability distributions & their {macroeconomic} class emergences. Which is different {+/-} from an ‘arithmomorphic’ one, even if such is conceivable in this context. This is one more classic example of how COMPLEXITY is the essence of the GESTALT in the context of the social sciences. e.g. Macro economics. And why ontologically amateurish attempts to ‘add-up’ micro economic phenomena into one great macro economic one are so futile & even preposterous.
    I advise the reader to go to page 89 of TELOS & TECHNOS {197 page edition} and insert the preceding material into my content about Otto Neurath’s address {circa 1915} to his more hyper positivist colleagues. “It is the individual that takes its meaning from the whole. NOT the WHOLE which is the {arithmomorphic} summation of the individual parts. The reader should also reference Elizabeth Hoyt’s classic article about the place of the GESTALT in consumer economics. 1944. Thank you for your patience & forebearance. Please GOOGLE: (1} Norman L. Roth {2}Norman L. Roth, Economics {3} Norman L. Roth, economist {4} Norman L. Roth, Technological Time

  2. Norman L. Roth
    August 4, 2021 at 12:34 am

    By the way Mme. Maria Alejandra,
    Bravo !
    You show a deep & sweeping grasp about what the organic complexity of Economic /Market organic systems really is. Without the arrogance of ignorance about what the great thinkers of the past continue to teach us, despite there errors & omissions. After all, just like us, they were men & women of their own times.
    Norman L. Roth

    • Maria Alejandra Madi
      August 5, 2021 at 3:00 am

      Dear Mr Nornam,

      I highly appreciate your inspiring comments! Many thanks.

      I am trying to develop an ontology of the market as an organic system. Hayek has been an interesting point of departure, however i think that despite his evolutionary approach of the spontaneous order, he did not develop an ontology of economics. It seems like his concern was epistmeological and related with knowlehge in descentralized sysstems. Do you agee?

      I certainly need to read Hoyt´s article. The other semiotic dimension of my research is about the interaction between emotional interpretants and logicall interpretants.

      All the best

      Maria

      maria.madi2014@gmail.com

  3. Gavan McDonell
    August 4, 2021 at 5:58 am

    When will economists find out what Habermas and Luhmann were on about over a generation ago??

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.