Journals / Amme İdaresi Dergisi / 2009 / Cilt: 42 - Sayı: 2

The ''Invisible Hand'' in economics and social theory

İktisat ve Sosyal Teoride ''Görünmez El'' Eğretilmesi

Pages
45–65
Publication Date
2022-10-11
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Therefore, it is argued that adopting an "evolutionary hand" approach that allows for imbalances, inefficiencies and instabilities will be more helpful in respect of the generality and realisticity of the analysis.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study will argue that the "invisible hand" metaphor, one of key hypothesises of economic and social theory, can be a helpful casual hypothesis in to explain the emergence of a social order only if it offers some causal mechanism.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Otherwise, this might be reduced to empty, "Panglossian " metaphysics concerning merely optimal and desirable consequences, mostly unintentionally.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Therefore, it is argued that adopting an "evolutionary hand" approach that allows for imbalances, inefficiencies and instabilities will be more helpful in respect of the generality and realisticity of the analysis.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

This study will argue that the "invisible hand" metaphor, one of key hypothesises of economic and social theory, can be a helpful casual hypothesis in to explain the emergence of a social order only if it offers some causal mechanism. Otherwise, this might be reduced to empty, "Panglossian " metaphysics concerning merely optimal and desirable consequences, mostly unintentionally. The study maintains that such a functionalist and/or teleological understanding of the metaphor would restrict both its applicability and reality. Therefore, it is argued that adopting an "evolutionary hand" approach that allows for imbalances, inefficiencies and instabilities will be more helpful in respect of the generality and realisticity of the analysis.

Özet

Yazıda, iktisat ve sosyal teorinin önemli hipotezlerinden birisi olan "Görünmez El" eğretilemesinin, sosyal düzenin ortaya çıkışını açıklamak için kullanışlı bir nedensel hipotez olabilmesinin, içeriğinin ancak nedensel bir mekanizma ortaya konarak doldurulması ile mümkün olabileceği, aksi halde yaklaşımın, içi boş bir metafizik hipotez durumuna indirgenebileceği savunulmaktadır. Yazıda ayrıca, böyle bir içerik doldurmasının da, hem "mekanizmacı" analojilerden hem de işlevselciliğe yaslanan bir "Panglosscu" evrim anlayışından uzak durması yoluyla mümkün olacağı ve dengesizliklere, etkinsizliklere ve istikrarsızlıklara olanak veren bir "evrimci el" anlayışının benimsenmesinin analizin genelliği ve gerçekçiliği bakımından daha yararlı olacağı gösterilmektedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

ÖZEL, H. (2022). The ''Invisible Hand'' in economics and social theory. Amme İdaresi Dergisi, Cilt: 42 - Sayı: 2, 45–65. https://ajindex.com/articles/435478

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (18)

  1. Arrow, Kenneth (1994), “Methodological Individualism and Social Knowledge”, American Economic Review, Papers and Proceedings, May. Arrow, Kenneth - Frank Hahn (1971),
  2. General Competitive Analysis, North Holland. Aydınonat, N. Emrah (2006), “Is the Invisible Hand un−Smithian? A Comment on Rothschild”, Economics Bulletin, Vol. 2, No. 2, p. 1-9.
  3. Bhaskar, Roy (1975),
  4. A Realist Theory of Science, Leeds: Leeds Books Ltd. Bonner, John (1986), Introduction to the Theory of Social Choice, Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
  5. Brennon, Geoffrey - Philip Pettit (1993), “Hands Invisible and Tangible”, Synthese, Vol. 94, p. 191-225.
  6. Bulutay, Tuncer (1979),
  7. Genel Denge Kuramı, Ankara:
  8. SBF Yayınları.
  9. Burtt, Edwin Arthur (1924), The Metaphysical Foundation of Modern Physical Science: A Historical and Critical Essay, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul Ltd. (tıpkıbasım, Routledge 2001),
  10. Caldwell, Bruce (1997), “Hayek and Socialism”, The Journal of Economic Literature, Vol. 35, No. 4, p. 1856-1890.
  11. Caldwell, Bruce (2004), Hayek’s Challenge: An Intellectual Biography, Chicago: Chicago University Press.
  12. Coestler, Arthur (1964), The Sleepwalkers: A History of Man’s Changing Vision of the Universe, Harmonsworth: Penguin. David A. Martin (1990), “Economics as Ideology: on Making ‘The Invisible Hand’ Invisible”, Review of Social Economy, Vol. 48, No. 3, Autumn, p. 227-43.
  13. Dixit, Avinash K. - Barry J. Nalebuff (1991), Thinking Strategically: The Competitive Edge in Business, Politics, and Everday Life, New York: W. W. Norton & Company. Dosi G. - C. Freeman - R. Nelson - G. Silverberg - L. Soete (Eds.) (1988),
  14. Technical Change and Economic Theory, London: Francis Pinter and New York: Columbia University Press.
  15. Foster, J. (2000), “Competitive Selection, Self-organization, and Joseph A. Schumpeter”, Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Vol. 10, p. 311-328.
  16. Fusfeld, Daniel (2002),
  17. The Age of the Economist, Boston: Addison Wesley. Giddens, Anthony (1984), The Constitution of Society: Outline of the Theory of Structuration, Cambridge: Polity Press (Türkçe çevirisi, Toplumun Kuruluşu: Yapılaşma Kuramının Anahatları, (Çev. Hüseyin Özel), Ankara: Bilim ve Sanat Yayınevi, 1999)
  18. Glasman, Maurice (1996), Unnecessary Suffering: Managing the Market Utopia, Londra: Verso. Gordon, Scott (1991), The History and Philosophy of Social Science, New York: Routledge. Gould, Stephen J. - R. C. Lewontin (1979), “The Spandrels of San Marco and the Panglossian Paradigm: A Critique of the Adaptationist P