Economics is widely regarded as the queen of social sciences. It is single handedly the finest fodder for any philosopher’s brain. The megalomaniac inside us hesitantly waits for the idea to pan out. Let me predict something ,evethough completely irrelevant,the rise of consciousness in Quantum electrodynamics will eventually lead to a race trying to relate our consciousness with economics to the core.
The two ideas that i wish to discuss here, is common for all social sciences.
- The inclusion of highest cognitive force to each layer of analysis
- Non-linear relationship between base and superstructures.
Every social science flourish on the idea of multiple layers interacting with each other to generate a number of combinations each pertaining to a logical nature of behaviour of the layer. Lets consider an example, the Keynesian Multiplier effect, during a recession, he suggests the government to invest on high cost public projects which would generate employment and which in turn will lead to rise of demand and eventually the investors would come around these projects and slowly but surely will outweigh the debt the goverment has endured. In one chain of events,his beautiful perspective of demand generalised the need for government planning and control over markets. The house of cards will fall the moment we introduce the highest level of cognitive process in each chain of the system. The moment I assume, that the essential objective of these cognitive process is to minimise the expenditure of perceived valuable resource, everything in the chain is prone to large changes. The cognitive process encompass of all types of cognitive capabilities includinn emotional intelligence, behavioural differences etc that the participant possess at an individual level (more about that later).
I don’t blame Keynes here,but I do blame Hayek for his complete neglet of market behaviour thinking that market is the collective agreement of the participants and that centralised government planning is dangerous. He has practically assumed that any bunch of transaction is an agreement of buyer and seller where as in reality, it depends on the cognitive process involved in the transaction. Hopefully in future,I will try to argue with Marxian and Neoliberals.
For the second point in consideration, lets make an argument that we as a group of life forms were introduced to a completely isolated set of resource pool. How will our economic behaviour ? I am still pondering over the idea.But why Economics,The reason for my consideration of Economics is very simple, it is a base structure, the organisation and structuralisation of same can lead to formation of superstructures like polity etc. The formation of economic behaviour will essentially contribue to formation of our ethical nature, aesthetic sensibility and other social and mental structures. We sure know that they can be easily warped by economic problems as well. The economists of yesteryears often forget that the superstructures can often provide feedback to base structures , that there is non-linear two way relationship between base and superstructures.
If so, what should be the objective of development,markets are non-balancing, manipulative mess of a system, superstructures and base share a non-linear relationship that often picks up the side with more cognitive effort. The objective of development can be defined at a social level, but I strongly,rationally believe, it should be always suggested at individual level. I am in the process of forming a clear opinion on it, when the clarity of thought is achieved, I will discuss it with you.