Challenges of Uncertainty to Philosophy and Theory of Economy
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.37075/YB.2015.1.04Abstract
The work has set the task to analyze the emergence and evolution of the problem of uncertainty in scientific knowledge. The focus is on approaches and methods for the study of randomness, probability and chaos in the social field and in particular in the philosophy and theory of economics. The thesis has been argued that attention to uncertainty and attempts to define it evolve with the complexity of social relations in the era of the great geographical discoveries, and especially with the development of economic relations after 14th-15th centuries.The first person to direct his attention to the problem of randomness is the creator of the double-entry book keeping system Luca Pacioli, formulating a seemingly fun at first glance task-game. But it marks the beginning of a powerful tradition for the study of future uncertain events, in which the names of Pascal, Fermat Bernoulli dynasty, Gauss, Quetelet, Galton, Poincare, David Lorenz and others stand out. Gradually the idea is formed that the study of uncertainty should not be viewed only as a fun effort to solve some or other mathematical paradoxes, but as a serious and important to practice effort.All previous efforts to be given one or another conception of the nature of uncertainty and possible strategies for its use or control still bear the scars of the Enlightenment paradigm of linear thinking. That is why so far neither the philosophy of economics, nor economic theories have been able to build an adequate theory to provide reliable navigation guidance in an increasingly complex, multidirectional, dynamic and elusive of accurate predictions modern world.References
Barminsky, A. M. (2007). Uncertainty, Randomness, and Risk: The Path from Philosophical Interpretation to Appropriation. Dubna: Narod.ru. URL: http://www.barminsk.narod.ru/essay.htm (accessed 15.03.2015)
Lorenz, Edward (2000). The Nature of Chaos. St. Kliment Ohridski University Press. ISBN: 954-07-1412-5
Mises, Ludwig Edler von (2011). Human Action. Mak. ISBN: 978-954-8585-24-8
Panchev, Stoycho (2001). Theory of Chaos. Prof. Marin Drinov Publishing House of BAS. ISBN: 954-430-725-7
Prigogine, Ilya & Stengers, Isabelle (1989). The New Connection - Metamorphosis of Science. Nauka i Izkustvo.
Prodanov, Vasil (2001). The Idea of Chaos and the Reconsideration of the Philosophy of History. Philosophical Alternatives, 3-4.
Radev, Radi Dimitrov (1983). History of Ancient Philosophy. Nauka i Izkustvo.
Horozov, Emil (2005). The Scientific Legacy of Poincaré and Contemporary Mathematics. Yearbook of Sofia University "St. Kliment Ohridski", Faculty of Mathematics, pp. 10-16.
Chirikov, B.V. (1959). Resonant Processes in Magnetic Traps. Atomnaya Energiya, 6, 630.
D Bernoulli (1738). Specimen theoriae novae de mensura sortis. Commentarii academae scientiarium imperialis Petropolitanae, 175-192.
Bernoulli, Daniel (1954). Exposition of a New Theory on the Measurement of Risk. Econometrica, 22(1), 23-36. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1909829
Bernstein, P.L (1996). Against the gods: The remarkable story of risk. John Wiley & Sons.
M Boldrin (1997). The impact of chaos on economic theory. The Impact of Chaos on Science and Society, pp. 15.
L Pacioli (1494). Summa de arithmetica geometria proportioni et proportionalita. Venice: Paganinus de Paganinis. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5479/sil.440357.39088007406663
Galton, Francis (1875). IV. Statistics by intercomparison, with remarks on the law of frequency of error. The London Edinburgh and Dublin Philosophical Magazine and Journal of Science, 49(322), 33-46. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14786447508641172
Hayek, Friedrich August von (1945). The Use of Knowledge in Society. American Economic Review, 35(4). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511817410.007
Knight, Frank H. (1965). Risk, Uncertainty and Profit. Augustus M. Kelley, Bookseller.
Li, Tien-Yien & Yorke, James A. (1975). Period Three Implies Chaos. The American Mathematical Monthly, 82(10). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00029890.1975.11994008
Lorenz, Edward N. (1963). Deterministic Nonperiodic Flow. Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences, 20, 130-141. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(1963)020<0130:dnf>2.0.co;2
Lorenz, Edward N. (1963). Section of planetary sciences: The predictability of hydrodynamic flow. Transactions of the New York Academy of Sciences, 409-432. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2164-0947.1963.tb01464.x
Lorenz, Edward N. & Hilborn, Robert C. (1993). THE ESSENCE OF CHAOS. Seatle: University of Washington Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1119/1.17820
Pascal, Blaise (1897). Pensees. Paris: Léon Brunswick. URL: http://people.wku.edu/nathan.love/325/Pensees_brunschvicg.pdf (accessed Mars, 20.2015)
Pascal, Blaise (1654). Traité du triangle arithmétique. URL: http://www.lib.cam.ac.uk/deptserv/rarebooks/PascalTraite/pascalintro.pdf (accessed 2015-03-24)
Poincaré, Henri (1908). Science et méthode. Flammarion.
Jb, Rosser (2009). Chaos theory before Lorenz. Department of Economics, James Madison University.
A Smith (2005). The theory of moral sentiments. MetaLibri.
Smith, Adam (2007). The Welth of Nation. MetaLibri.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2015 Borislav Gradinarov (Author)

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors retain copyright to their works.
All publications are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) license.