"Evolution has changed all we know about how humans behave, compete and co-operate. When will economics catch up?"
I don't know, but the question seems to relate to things that are unrelated. However, the two subjects are related in the sense that they are both connected to humans. But evolution is a building mechanism whereas economics is a facilitator. Economics facilitates the evolutionary process in nature and human living. Evolution stays evolutionary. Economics is more difficult. It is always having to reinvent itself to keep up with the constant changes evolution introduces. That is why most times it is like "nailing jello to the wall".
To me it is like evolution doesn't concern itself with the laws of nature. But economics does. Economics concerns itself most with entropy, an evolutionary force that economics is always trying to combat and keep ahead of. (Communism succumbed to entropy.) One thing that evolution and economics have it common is that they are both renewal forces. But economics 'packages' the evolutionary forces so they are related to humans. Economics takes out much of the sting and rawness of evolution, which is more 'red in the tooth'.
As for the crises of 2008, economic theory hit a wall. Economic theory became too hubristic and too big for it britches. Can one find such an instance in evolution?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment