Radical Subjectivism as the Epistemological Foundation of Novel Entrepreneurial Action

Aeeni, Zeynab; Motevaseli, Mahmoud; Sakhdari, Kamal; Mobini Dehkordi, Ali

doi:10.22054/joer.2020.11905

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

¹ PhD in Entrepreneurship, Faculty of Entrepreneurship, University of Tehran

² Professor, Faculty of Economics, University of Tehran, Tehran

³ Assistant Professor, Faculty of Entrepreneurship, University of Tehran

⁴ Associate Professor, Faculty of Entrepreneurship, University of Tehran

https://doi.org/10.22054/joer.2020.11905

Abstract

Explaining change has always been one of the greatest challenges in social sciences. With a particular focus on economic change, Schumpeter introduced novelty as the key to fundamental changes and subsequent economic development. Recognizing the corresponding epistemological foundations of a novel phenomenon is the starting point for understanding itself, its process, conditions, and prerequisites. Hence, in this paper, first we discuss the assumptions governing novelty and novel phenomena. Then, we compare the three major approaches used to explain entrepreneurial phenomena in the literature, namely neoclassic, neo-Austrian, and radical subjectivism, and we explain the appropriate novelty-based epistemological foundation of entrepreneurship. To better understand radical subjectivism, we discuss its five fundamental assumptions, namely “imaginative choice,” “plans based on past experiences and future expectations”, “heterogeneity and in equilibrium”, “the metaphor of the world as a kaleidoscope” and “the creation of order”. finally, the implications of these assumptions are set forth for future research on economics and entrepreneurship.

Keywords

References

داودی بنی، مجید (1393) «معنای علم: تحلیل و نقد برداشت پدیدارشناسانه از سیر تکوین علم در اندیشه هوسرل»، هستی و شناخت، جلد ا، شماره 1: 20-5.

فتح‌زاده، حسن (1387)، «دیدگاه هوسرل در باب علم»، پژوهش‌نامه علوم انسانی (دو فصلنامه فلسفی شناخت)، شماره 1: 144-115.

متوسلی، محمود (1394)، «نگاهی معرفت‌شناختی به جایگاه و منشا ناولتی در توسعه اقتصادی»، فصلنامه توسعه کارآفرینی، دوره 8، شماره3 : 431-413.

متوسلی، محمود و رستمیان، علی (1396)، «ذهنی‌گرایی، بیناذهنیت و کنش خلاق در مکتب اتریشی»، فصلنامه پژوهشنامه اقتصادی، سال هفدهم، شماره64 : 32-1.

Acs, Z. J (2008). “Foundations of high impact entrepreneurship”. Foundations and Trends in Entrepreneurship, 4(6). PP, 535-620.

Baumol, W. J (2008, January). “Entrepreneurs, Inventors and the Growth of the Economy”. In the Conference Board EPWP, pp, 08-12.

Becker, M. C., Esslinger, H. U., Hedtke, U., and Knudsen, T (2005). “Introduction to Schumpeter’s “Development”. Journal of Economic Literature, 43(1). PP, 108-120.

Buchanan, J. M., and Vanberg, V. J (1991). “The Market as a Creative Process”. Economics & Philosophy, 7(2). PP, 167-186.

Chiles, T. H., Bluedorn, A. C., and Gupta, V. K (2007). “Beyond Creative Destruction and Entrepreneurial Discovery: A Radical Austrian Approach to Entrepreneurship”. Organization Studies, 28(4). PP, 467-493.

Chiles, T. H., Tuggle, C. S., McMullen, J. S., Bierman, L., and Greening, D. W (2010a). “Dynamic Creation: Extending the Radical Austrian Approach to Entrepreneurship”. Organization Studies, 31(1). PP, 7-46.

Chiles, T. H., Vultee, D. M., Gupta, V. K., Greening, D. W., and Tuggle, C. S (2010b). “The Philosophical Foundations of a Radical Austrian Approach to Entrepreneurship”. Journal of Management Inquiry, 19(2). PP, 138-164.

Chiles, T., RSTA Elias, S., G. Zarankin, T., and M. Vultee, D (2013). “The Kaleidic World of Entrepreneurs: Developing and Grounding a Metaphor for Creative Imagination”. Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management: An International Journal, 8(3). PP, 276-307.

Henrekson, M., and Sanandaji, T (2011). “The Interaction of Entrepreneurship and Institutions”. Journal of Institutional Economics, 7(1). PP, 47-75.

Hodgson, G. M (1998). “The Approach of Institutional Economics”. Journal of Economic Literature, 36(1). PP, 166-192.

Hodgson, G. M (2000). “What is the Essence of Institutional Economics?”. Journal of Economic Issues, 34(2). PP, 317-329.

Kautonen, T., Palmroos, J., and Vainio, P (2009). “Involuntary Self-employment'in Finland: A Bleak Future?”. International Journal of Public Policy, 4(6). PP, 533-548.

Kirzner, I. M (1997). “Entrepreneurial Discovery and the Competitive Market Process: An Austrian approach”. Journal of economic Literature, 35(1). PP. 60-85.

Kirzner, I. M (2009). “The Alert and Creative Entrepreneur: A Clarification”. Small Business Economics, 32(2). PP, 145-152.

Jackson, W. A (1995). “Naturalism in Economics”. Journal of Economic Issues, 29, PP, 761-780.

Lachmann, L.M., (1970). the Legacy of Max Weber, London: Heinnemann.

Lachmann, L. M (1976a). “From Mises to Shackle: An Essay on Austrian Economics and the Kaleidic society”. Journal of Economic Literature, 14(1). PP, 54-62.

Lachmann, L. M (1976b). “On the Central concept of Austrian Economics: Market Process”. The Foundations of Modern Austrian Economics, PP, 126-32.

Lachmann, L.M (1986). The Market as an Economic Process, Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

Lachmann, L. M (1990). “Austrian Economics: A Hermeneutic Approach”. In D. Lavoie (Ed.). Economics and Hermeneutics, PP, 134-146). London: Routledge.

Lewin, P., (2011). “Entrepreneurial Paradoxes: Implications of Radical Subjectivism”. In School of Management, University of Texas at Dallas, Prepared for the Austrian Economics Colloquium, PP, 1-17.

Lewis, P., & Runde, J (2007). “Subjectivism, Social Structure and the Possibility of Socio-economic Order: The Case of Ludwig Lachmann”. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 62(2). PP, 167-186.

Littlechild, S. C (1979). “Comment: Radical Subjectivism or Radical Subversion?”. Time, Uncertainty, and Disequilibrium: Exploration of Austrian Themes, PP, 32-49.

Loasby, B. J (1998). “Ludwig M. Lachmann: Subjectivism in Economics and the Economy”. Subjectivism and Economic Analysis: Essays in Memory of Ludwig M. Lachmann, London and New York: Routledge, PP, 12-30.

Rosen, S (1997). “Austrian and Neoclassical Economics: Any Gains from Trade?”. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 11(4). PP, 139-152.

Sarasvathy, S. D., Dew, N., Velamuri, S. R., and Venkataraman, S (2003). “Three Views of Entrepreneurial Opportunity”. In Handbook of Entrepreneurship Research, Springer, Boston, MA, PP. 141-160.

Sarasvathy, S. D (2004). “The Questions we ask and the Questions we Care About: Reformulating Some Problems in Entrepreneurship Research”. Journal of Business Venturing, 19, PP, 707-717.

Sautet, F (2018). “The Battle for the Essence of Entrepreneurship”. The Review of Austrian Economics, 31(1). PP, 123-139.

Schumpeter, J. A (1947). “The Creative Response in Economic History”. The Journal of Economic History, 7(2). PP, 149-159.

Shackle, G. L. S (1949). Expectation in Economics, Cambridge University Press.

Shackle, G. L. S (1966). “Policy, Poetry and Success”. The Economic Journal, 76(304). PP, 755-767.

Shackle, G. L. S (1972). Epistemics and Economics, Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Shackle, G. L. S (1979). Imagination, Formalism and Choice in Time, Uncertainty and Disequilibrium, M. J. Rizzo (ed). PP, 19-31. Lexington, MA: D. C. Heath.

Shackle, G. L (1983). The Bounds of Unknowledge, In Beyond Positive Economics, Wiseman J (ed). PP, 28-37. Macmillan, London, UK.

Scholman, G., van Stel, A., and Thurik, R (2015). “The Relationship Among Entrepreneurial Activity, Business Cycles and Economic Openness”. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 11(2). PP, 307-319.

Shane, S (2009). “Why Encouraging more People to Become Entrepreneurs is Bad Public Policy”. Small Business Economics, 33(2). PP, 141-149.

Smith, Barry (1994). “Austrian Philosophy: The Legacy of Franz Brentano”. La Salle: Open Court. Also available online at: http://ontology.buffalo.edu/smith/book/austrian _philosophy, PP, 1-36.

Van de Ven, Andrew H., and Rhonda M. Engleman, (2004). “Event- and Outcome-driven Explanations of Entrepreneurship", Journal of Business Venturing 19, PP, 343–358.

Venkataraman, S (1997). “The Distinctive Domain of Entrepreneurship Research”. Advances in Entrepreneurship, Firm Emergence and Growth, 3(1). PP, 119-138.

Zappia, C (1998). “Radical Subjectivism and Austrian Economics”. Subjectivism and Economic Analysis. London: Routledge.

Economics Research

Radical Subjectivism as the Epistemological Foundation of Novel Entrepreneurial Action

References

References

Volume 20, Issue 76
April 2020
Pages 223-251

Radical Subjectivism as the Epistemological Foundation of Novel Entrepreneurial Action

References

References

Volume 20, Issue 76April 2020Pages 223-251

Volume 20, Issue 76
April 2020
Pages 223-251