AN ECONOMIC EPISTEMOLOGY

Given the inadequate treatment of knowledge in the Standard Model, it is appropriate to seek a fuller and richer understanding of ‘knowledge about knowledge’ as expressed by other disciplines.  This is imperative  if Economics is to satisfactorily explain the so-called ‘knowledge-based economy’.

After explaining what I mean by the Standard Model, I examine seven of its inadequacies (Part I) using findings derived from trans-disciplinary induction (Part II).  This methodology, in turn, generates an economic epistemology tailored to a knowledge-based economy (Part III).

 

I

Seven Inadequacies

1. Bentham’s Epicurean Atomism (Ryle 1949; Hayek 1952) vs. Freeman’s Circular (1999 & 2000) & Murdal’s Cumulative Causality (1939)

2. Calculatory Rationalism vs. Loasby’s Pattern Recognition  (2003) & Gardner’s Multiple Intelligence (2004)

3. Diminishing Marginal Product vs. Marshall’s Industrial District (1919 &1920), Krugman’s New Economic Geography (1983) & David’s Techno-Economic Regimes & Network Economies (1990)

4. Intermediate Input & Stigler/Becker’s De Gustibus Non Est Disputandum (1977) vs. Marshall’s the pattern that sells the thing (1920), Galbraith’s Italy (1983) & Reich's The Work of Nations (1992)

5. Certainty & Uncertainty vs. Ignorance, Boulding’s Wit (1966), Shackle’s Surprise (1973) & Keynes’ Animal Spirits (1936)

6. Public Goods, Intellectual Property & the Public Domain (Boyle 2003)

7. Technological Change & Romer’s New Growth Economics (1986 & 1996) vs. Chartrand’s Tooled Knowledge (2004)

 

Harry Hillman Chartrand ©

4^th Annual Research Seminar

Department of Economics

University of Saskatchewan

October 23, 2004

 

II

Trans-Disciplinary Induction

Rationale

Given the theoretical inadequacies of mainstream economic thought in explaining a global knowledge-based economy, 'knowledge about knowledge' was harvested from five disciplines and sixteen of their sub-disciplines plus etymology.  Findings were captured at the event horizon before entering the black hole of intra-disciplinary debate.

III

An Economic Epistemology

 

KNOWLEDGE AS MONAD

AS DYAD

AS TRIAD

AS QUBIT

 *    A functional or holistic expression of a four-fold measure of knowledge

**    Derived from the Oxford English Dictionary (OED)

***  Adapted from the Analytic Psychology terms for the four human faculties of knowing: thinking, intuition, feeling and sensation

**** NES = Natural & Engineering Sciences; HSS = Humanities & Social Sciences; The Arts = Literary, Media, Performing & Visual Art; The Practices = Accounting, Architecture, Engineering, Law, Medicine & other self-regulating professions

*****   Legal requirement that new knowledge be fixed, for a limited period of time, in a material matrix to qualify for protection as property before entering the public domain.  Alternatively the matrix may be utilitarian, non-utilitarian or a person. Without fixation knowledge immediately enters the public domain.

****** Technological change in Economics is defined as the impact of new knowledge on the production function of the firm or nation.  Alternatively, such new knowledge may be disembodied (systemic) or embodied (localized); and/or, endogenous or exogenous to the firm, economy or the nation.