[Ask the Gulch] I have been looking at objectivist economic theory in terms of Adam Smith, Friedrich Hayek, and Steven Strogatz (Spontaneous order). I see an emerging mathematical model that is consistent with Ayn Rand's view of a successful economic system. - Galt's Gulch

Remove this ad.

5

[Ask the Gulch] I have been looking at objectivist economic theory in terms of Adam Smith, Friedrich Hayek, and Steven Strogatz (Spontaneous order). I see an emerging mathematical model that is consistent with Ayn Rand's view of a successful economic system.

Posted by ProfChuck 9 years, 6 months ago to Ask the Gulch

5 comments | Share | Best of... | Flag

Add Comment

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

2

Posted by Zenphamy 9 years, 6 months ago

Don't you think that maybe trying to find or develop a 'mathematical model' of any particular economy only enforces or strongly influences government to attempt to limit real world inputs and feedback to support the model, rather than the model following the real world economy which is at least as complicated as climate and weather models.

I think that was the failure of Keynes (who was a mathematician) and the government that followed his descriptions and policies.

edit: clarify

Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink
- 1
  
  Posted by ProfChuck 9 years, 6 months ago
  
  I don't think so. One of the consequences of the math behind SO is the so called "Interference effect" which is closely related to the "observer effect". Interference in the process, which is an attempt at control, only serves to restrict the size of the theater of operations which reduces or even eliminates the productive properties of SO. It is one thing to try to understand the phenomenon so one can determine where it leads it is quite another to try to control it to gain a specific outcome. Attempts to control SO appear to cause it to collapse. The history of such attempts seem to bear that out.
  
  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink

1

Posted by dbhalling 9 years, 6 months ago

Profchuck,

I do not think you can square objectivism with Hayek or Smith. Both are part of the English enlightenment and fans of David Hume. Hayek is explicit that he does not think reason can tell you anything about ethics or that you can logically/rationally derive a social system. For more see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bkwILXhh...

Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink
- 2
  
  Posted by ProfChuck 9 years, 6 months ago
  
  Point well taken. However, I think that Hayek underestimated the significance of his ideas. If as an element of objective reality spontaneous order is indeed a real phenomena then two things follow; it cannot be directly controlled, and it is possible to profit from an understanding of its properties.
  Spontaneous order provides a testable explanation of why free trade systems work and why collectivism and central planning systems fail. It also suggests a strong linkage between a moral framework and success.
  Spontaneous order succeeds in the market place when there are a large number of participants each pursuing their own objectives and goals. How is that different from objectivism?
  
  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
  - 1
    
    Posted by dbhalling 9 years, 5 months ago
    
    Yes, spontaneous order is interesting. However, I am no fan of Hayek either way. There is an interesting book called Jefferson's moose that talks about the spontaneous order that occurred among frontier people. There was no official law. However, I think it is safe to say that most of these people agreed on what the law should be and this would not have occurred without that agreement.
    
    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink

Comment hidden.