Date: Fri, 12 Apr 1996 07:22:20 -0600
Subject:  Re: evolutionary/economic analogy? -Reply



>>> Justin Schwartz <jschwart-AT-freenet.columbus.oh.us>  4/11/96 
I'm not endorsing "rational choice" evolutionary theory in the manner
of J.M. Smith, just remarking that it exemplifies the role of
analogy, or a role for analogy, in the exact sciences. 

Lisa:  Why not endorse John Maynard Smith?  I think his little book
on _Evolution and the Theory of Games_ is a gem.  This and other work
have reframed evolutionary theory in powerful and useful ways.  

JS: In fact the theory only applies by analogy to people as
biological organisms, because while we do have mental states it's
absurd to say that as a matter of empirical fact anyone tries to
maximize evolutionary fitness.

Lisa:  Well... I think that's a very complicated issue, and I tend to
disagree.  I know there are lots of reasons that it doesn't look that
way in some cultures, but it is explicit in many, and is underlying
for all biological organisms.  Brain/mind/mentality itself is a
product of evolution, and what does an adaptation do, but chase
fitness.

JS:  The point is that the analogy is constitutive of the structure
of the theory.  No analogy, no theory. 

Lisa:  This I don't get.  The way I see it, if there weren't already
economic methods of dealing with diminishing returns, tradeoffs,
free-riders, cooperation and collective action problems, evolution
theorists would have invented them.  It is the actual structure of
nature, natural selection and its products that we want to capture
with the theory.  [That's how I generally view science and
theory-building.]

Cheers,
Lisa



     --- from list marxism2-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---