In these past few weeks I have come upon
an idea that has tied my studies in Philosophy, History and Economics together.
I have come to realize it is wrong, but at least is an interesting idea and is still
worth sharing in a short format.
The American Philosopher, Thomas Kuhn in
his 1962 book, The Structure
of Scientific Revolutions talked about how science does not
proceed linearly, but rather in large steps. For example, when Eisenstein came
along all of science took a large leap forward and in a sense left behind
anything that had to do with the old system. Being a Logical Positivist of the
Vienna Circle he believed knowledge to be progressing on a certain path.
Now let us back up to the Middle Ages. Dr.
Sautet of Catholic University of America in his lectures often emphasizes the
concept that for the greater part of economic history accumulation of wealth
was simple: plunder, rape, and pillage. We still see this panning out, even
with the Church and her moral norms. The Feudal system, Colonialism, Absolutism
were all just different forms of the same basic and simple economics.
It was not till the Industrial Revolution
that there was paradigm shift. Those that followed it experienced a large
increase in wealth (England, US), those who didn't see the shift did not
(Russia). These shifts can be followed into the computers and then global
markets.
First, this idea is wrong because it
borders closely to Marxism. I do not want to go there. Second, it fails to
recognize the deeper trends and realities in Economics for most of human
history.
No comments:
Post a Comment