Until now, economic theory has studied human behavior in the economic sphere, searching for answers to the questions: “What, for whom and how to produce?” Nobel laureate G. S. Becker in his research uses an economic approach to study the behavior of people in areas that, as a rule, are not of interest to economists.

The economic approach assumes maximizing behavior over a wider range. It does not require that individual agents necessarily be aware of their desire to maximize. The economic approach is comprehensive: it is applicable to any human behavior - monetary and shadow prices, one-time and repeated decisions, emotionally charged and neutral goals, the behavior of people with any income level, any profession. Let us apply the approach in social, legal, and household spheres life of society.

IN social sphere The concept of the economics of discrimination is highlighted. If a person has a preference for dealing with certain groups of people, then his tendency to do so can be measured by comparing it with the costs of contact with a particular group. Accordingly, the discrimination coefficient (DC) is the link between the monetary and net costs of the transaction between the entrepreneur and the employee. Discrimination can create differences in levels wages between two groups. The market discrimination coefficient (MDC) can be defined as the ratio between these levels:

Where πw and πn are the equilibrium wages of groups W and N, which are substitutes in relation to each other. Exactly how discrimination affects the income of groups is shown in the graph:

Point p0 corresponds to the income ratio in the absence of discrimination, point p1 corresponds to the income ratio under full segregation, and the p0wp1 curve corresponds to the income ratio under various levels of discrimination by W. As discrimination increases, the overall MDC against N increases.

The economic approach in the legal sphere is associated, first of all, with the fact that crimes cause material damage to the state. In other words, crime is a source of costs. It is obvious that the amount of harm to other members of society increases with the number of crimes committed. The price of the winnings that criminals receive also increases with the increase in the number of crimes. Based on this, the net cost to society is measured by the difference between the harm caused and the gain received. The relationship between the results of the activities of law enforcement agencies can be represented as a function A=f(m, r, c), where A is the result of their activities, and m is the amount of wages, r is other expenses and c is capital costs. We get production function f. Intensifying the law enforcement system implies rising costs. IN general outline The level of law enforcement activity can be judged by the level of solved crimes. An increase in the likelihood of solving crimes and an increase in the number of crimes lead to an increase in total costs.

A more realistic approach involves abandoning the assumption that the level of activity is measured only by solving crimes and that p (the probability of solving a crime) and O (the number of crimes) have equal elasticities. This makes it possible to use a more general relationship A=h(p, O,a), where a is the number of arrests made and other results characterizing the activities of the law enforcement system. Hence the average cost of crime: .

What factors influence the number of crimes? The economic approach assumes that a person makes a choice in favor of a crime when the expected utility from committing a crime will be higher than the expected utility in the case of another pastime. There is a function that sets the relationship between the number of crimes and the probability that the criminal will be caught, the severity of the punishment. It can be represented as Oj=Oj(pj, f, uj), where Oj is the number of crimes committed by the jth criminal, pj is the probability of his capture, fj is the punishment for each crime, uj is a variable reflecting the combined influence of all others factors. The total number of crimes is denoted by O (the sum of all possible Oj), in which case the function takes the form O=O(p, f, u).

Method of psychotherapy.

The theoretical premise of the economic approach is based on the assertion that any psychological activity can be expressed in terms of mental energy available (and required) for these processes; The economic approach describes the distribution of energy and the amount of excitation within the mental apparatus, and also serves to describe cathexis. The economic view of the psyche understands it as a system governed by the energy of instincts, and the differences between the conscious (ego) and unconscious (id) areas are understood through the prism of differences in the level and form of energy distribution between these areas.

According to the economic approach, energy distribution is considered in the context of its final object, source and voltage level. According to the definition of Borness Moore and Bernard Fine, this approach postulates: “laws other than intentionality operate within the psyche.” An example of the economic point of view is the concept of the defense mechanism of sublimation.

see also

Notes

Literature

• Leibin, Valery. Dictionary-reference book on psychoanalysis. - M.: AST, 2010. - 956 p. - (Psychology). - 3000 copies. - ISBN 978-5-17-063584-9
• Psychoanalytic terms and concepts: Dictionary / Ed. B. Moore, B. Faina. - M.: Class, 2000. - 304 p. - (Library of psychology and psychotherapy). - ISBN 5-86375-023-5
• Rycroft, Charles. Critical Dictionary of Psychoanalysis. - St. Petersburg. : East European Institute of Psychoanalysis, 1995. - 288 p. - 10,000 copies. - ISBN 5-88787-001-X
• Etchegoyen, Horacio. The Fundamentals of Psychoanalytic Technique. - Karnac Books, 2006. - 876 p. - ISBN 9781855754553
• Gibbs, William. Demystifying meaningful coincidences (synchronicities). - Jason Aronson, 2010. - 319 p. - ISBN 9780765707024
• Samuels, Andrew. Jung and the Post-Jungians. - Routledge, 1986. - 304 p. - ISBN 9780415059046
• Stein, Juliet. Other than identity: the subject, politics and art. - Manchester University Press ND, 1997. - 242 p. - ISBN 9780719044632
• Ferrell, Robyn. Passion in theory: conceptions of Freud and Lacan. - Routledge, 1996. - 118 p. - ISBN 9780415090209

Wikimedia Foundation. 2010.

See what “Economic approach” is in other dictionaries:

ecological-economic approach- - [A.S. Goldberg. English-Russian energy dictionary. 2006] Energy topics in general EN ecological and economic approach ... Technical Translator's Guide

economic- (adj.), ECONOMY German: tskonomisch. French: economy. English: economic. Use: econf mico. Italian: economico. Portuguese: econfmico. Everything that relates to the hypothesis according to which mental processes represent exchange and redistribution... ... Dictionary of Psychoanalysis

Contents 1 Main features 2 History and main representatives ... Wikipedia

ECONOMIC IMPERIALISM, the spread of the methodology of neoclassical economic theory (see NEOCLASSICAL DIRECTION) to the study of processes and phenomena traditionally attributed to the scope of other social disciplines of sociology,... ... encyclopedic Dictionary

Economic cycle- – a natural form of economic development, in which the rise in production, employment levels, and GDP growth is replaced by periods of recession. It is customary to distinguish the following phases economic cycle: economic recovery, or economic boom - a stage when ... ... Banking Encyclopedia

Economic- in psychoanalysis – an adjective related to the noun “energy”. Economic concepts and formulations are concerned with the distribution of energy, libido and cathexes within the psychic apparatus. * * * is a concept used in psychoanalysis when... Encyclopedic Dictionary of Psychology and Pedagogy

Sociocultural approach (multifactorial)- a direction that has developed in the field of methodology of humanitarian knowledge. It comes from the idea that social facts must be examined in a comprehensive manner. The main role here is played by the combination of social and cultural... ... Man and Society: Culturology. Dictionary-reference book

The neutrality of this article has been questioned. The talk page may have more details. Not to be confused with economic term Default. Economic crisis... Wikipedia

- (KhNEU, INZHEK) ... Wikipedia

Status Active Industry Economy ... Wikipedia

Books

• Economic analysis of economic activity. Textbook, Markaryan Eduard Aramovich, Gerasimenko Galina Petrovna, Markaryan Sergey Eduardovich. The textbook consists of three sections that reflect a systematic approach to the analysis of economic and financial activities commercial organizations. The first section outlines the methodology...

Within the framework of this approach, society is considered in connection with such economically significant factors as the method of production, accumulation and distribution of wealth. It reveals how, from a specific historical perspective, the action of these factors influences various structures and institutions of society, leading to certain social and political problems or contributing to their resolution; role being explored economic factors in connection with the values ​​and goals that can be cultivated in society.

It should be noted that the economy as an activity for the production, accumulation and distribution of material wealth exists at every stage of human history, however, the assessment of the role and mechanisms of this activity in different periods of history was different.

In antiquity and the Middle Ages one can find examples of judgments about the economy that have social and philosophical significance. In particular, according to Aristotle, wealth as a set necessary funds is of great importance both for the privacy of people and within government activities. However, wealth is only a means to ensure a normal life, but in no case is it a goal to which one can strive for its own sake. The presence of wealth makes it possible for a free person to engage in deeds worthy of him, for example, to serve society or improve himself in the sciences and arts. Money as a medium of exchange is natural and useful. However, money (unlike natural reserves, which deteriorate) has no natural limit to the amount of its accumulation. And this is a prerequisite for the fact that “everyone involved in money turnover strives to increase the amount of money ad infinitum.” It follows that instead of being a means, wealth itself can become an end and, thereby, compete with other, more significant goals. According to Aristotle, this is bad: “At the heart of this direction (the accumulation of wealth is approx. auto) lies the desire for life in general, but not for the good life.”

In the Middle Ages, the problem of wealth was also addressed, however, mainly within the framework of religious and moral issues. For the Middle Ages (as well as for antiquity), the problem of “fair price” was relevant. “Price” here was not understood as purely economic category(in connection with costs and profits; as a result of supply and demand), but also as a moral standard according to which economically significant actions were evaluated. In Europe, the pursuit of wealth before the Reformation (16th century) was consistently condemned, especially the charging of interest (usury), which was directly declared a sin.

Thus, such an “obvious” and “natural” problem for modern economic science as the question of effective ways increasing wealth in conditions of total shortage just 400 - 500 years ago was not only not relevant, but, moreover, the desire for this was regarded as unreasonable and unworthy behavior.

The question of why there were corresponding changes in views on wealth was one of the first to be studied by the German sociologist Max Weber (1864 - 1920). Weber, in his work “The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism,” came to the conclusion that the reasons for the spread and establishment of the entrepreneurial spirit in Europe should be sought in the peculiarities of the religious doctrine of Protestantism, where, in contrast to Catholicism, the emphasis was not on formal adherence to the dogma of Christianity, but on moral practice , expressed in the worldly service of a person, in the fulfillment of his earthly duty.

Economics in a more or less modern sense - as the theory of liberal markets - originates from the works of the English economist Adam Smith (1723 - 1790). Smith expressed the idea that the main source of a nation’s wealth under capitalism is not the protectionist policy of the state in the form of protecting the domestic market from foreign competition and not active trade balance for finished goods (as economists who adhered to the doctrine of mercantilism believed), but the creation by the state of such conditions when every active member of society can satisfy their own interests, striving, first of all, for their own benefit. Selfishness and selfish interest of everyone is, according to Smith, the main source of universal prosperity. “It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their observance of their own interests. We appeal not to humanity, but to their selfishness and never tell them about our needs, but only about their benefits.”

Smith, therefore, believed that it is the entrepreneur’s desire to achieve his private interests that is the main driving force of economic development, ultimately increasing the well-being of both himself and society as a whole. The problem, however, is that in the 18th and 19th centuries. well-being of a significant part of society ( employees) was very far from ideal. Hard labor for 16 hours a day (including for children), life in barracks, lack of rights and poverty did not fit in with the idea that the primary satisfaction of an entrepreneur’s own interests is the key to general prosperity.

The protest against such conditions of existence found expression in the political-economic doctrine of Marxism, or a system of ideas that were originally formulated by the German philosopher and economist Karl Marx (1818 – 1883).

The actual economic component of Marxism is presented in Marx’s “Capital”. In this work, unlike the so-called “bourgeois political economy” (an example of the latter is the just mentioned doctrine of A. Smith), which proceeds from the fact that the main sources of wealth are such factors of production as land (its natural fertility), machinery and equipment, as well as the labor of those who directly executes the corresponding manufacturing process or organizes it, Marx came to the conclusion that the only source of value and wealth is the labor of hired workers. According to Marx, labor as a commodity is bought by the capitalist on the market for a certain price (wages) and is combined with other factors of production, for example, machines and equipment. The price of products produced with the help of these factors of production and then sold on the market is higher than the original price of the factors of production. It follows from this that the source of more high price It is precisely labor that creates new or surplus value, which is unfairly appropriated by the capitalist.

The main objection to the economic doctrine of Marxism is most often the assertion that the labor of hired workers is not the only source of value, since other factors of production are also important. In particular, machinery and equipment that have a certain price were once purchased by the capitalist at own funds. Consequently, its costs must be taken into account in the cost of the final product, and not just the labor of hired workers. The answer to this from the point of view of Marxism is that the capitalist was able to accumulate funds and buy the appropriate equipment because he had previously, in the previous production cycle, appropriated for himself part of the value that is created by labor. The capitalist pays the hired worker a wage, the amount of which is significantly less than that the value that his labor creates. He takes the rest from the difference between the wages and the price of the goods sold, and then uses these funds to buy the appropriate equipment. Thus, from the point of view of Marxism, only the labor of a hired worker is the only source of value and wealth in society.

The described state of affairs, from the point of view of Marxism, is not only subjectively experienced by the oppressed, exploited class of wage earners as unjust, but also objectively, from a historical perspective, cannot continue for too long. The reason for this is that at a certain stage in the development of society, the private capitalist form of appropriation of wealth comes into conflict with the social nature of production. In a society where the production system is very complex, i.e. where are individual enterprises and industries economic activity are closely related to each other and act only as separate components in the system social division labor required centralized system production organization and related planning. And this can be achieved only on the basis of the socialization of the relevant factors of production. Marx himself writes about it this way: “The monopoly of capital becomes the fetters of the mode of production that grew up under it and under it. The centralization of the means of production and the socialization of labor reach a point where they become incompatible with their capitalist shell. She explodes. The hour of capitalist property is striking. Expropriators are expropriated."

Economic crises of overproduction, which are characteristic of capitalism, are, from the point of view of Marxism, evidence that on the basis of private interest (many such individual interests) it is impossible to effectively organize and manage the process economic activity. Specifically, historically and politically, the transition from the private capitalist to the social nature of production (from capitalism to socialism) occurs in the form of a social (socialist) revolution.

Marxism as a historical and philosophical doctrine is a theory of socio-economic formations or historically established types of society, which are based on a certain mode of production.

Each mode of production corresponds to certain productive forces and production relations. Productive forces are the means of production (means of labor, i.e. tools, instruments, machines, etc., with the help of which they influence objects of labor, i.e. natural raw materials or partially processed materials) and people who have certain production experience and labor skills that allow them to put the means of production into operation. Production relations, or more precisely, production-economic relations, are relations between people regarding the production, distribution, exchange and consumption of relevant goods. Examples industrial relations: relations between slave and slave owner; peasant and feudal lord; wage worker and capitalist.

Productive forces and production relations, together, in Marxism are called the “base”, i.e. the material basis that determines the appearance of any society. The state, its laws and institutions, political parties and the programs (ideologies) they defend are a “superstructure” over the base, which is a reflection and political and legal justification (legitimation) of the corresponding type of production relations. In particular, the doctrine of liberalism as its ideological justification corresponds to bourgeois production relations. Marxist social doctrine is called materialist in the sense that here it is the material factors (base) that determine the corresponding ideas in the superstructure, and not vice versa. According to Marx, “it is not the consciousness of people that determines their existence, but, on the contrary, their social existence determines their consciousness.”

The historical development of society, from the point of view of Marxism, is a movement from the primitive communal, through the ancient Eastern, slave-owning and feudal to the capitalist, and from there to the communist socio-economic formation. All of these formations - except the first and last - are characterized by antagonism between the oppressors and the oppressed due to the exploitation of the latter by the former through the ownership of property. “Free and slave, patrician and plebeian, landowner and serf, master and apprentice, in short, oppressor and oppressed were in eternal antagonism to each other, waged a continuous, sometimes hidden, sometimes open struggle, always ending in a revolutionary reorganization of the entire social edifice or common death fighting classes".

The transition from one formation to another occurs due to objective reasons, since each subsequent formation, as a certain method of production, provides a more efficient production activities than the previous one. In order for such a transition to occur, productive forces must first develop, then certain relations of production come into conformity with them, and, finally, a revolution in the superstructure occurs. In particular, capitalism as the corresponding relations of production replaced feudalism because manufactories and factories working for the market, for their effective functioning, required the existence of a market of free wage labor, i.e. the proletariat, whose representatives, due to production needs and market conditions, can be freely hired, trained and fired. Feudal conditions, i.e. Often the eternal dependence of a significant part of the population on their permanent owners is much less suitable for organizing efficient and more or less mobile market production.

Despite the impressive criticism of bourgeois economic relations, the socialist revolution, about the inevitability of which in the 19th century. said K. Marx, did not happen (with the exception of the USSR and a number of countries associated with it; but, as historical experience has shown, in most of these countries socialism was a temporary phenomenon). Why did it happen that Marx’s prediction did not come true? In order to answer this, it is necessary to turn to the analysis of those social transformations that occurred in Western society in the 20th century, which greatly changed its appearance compared to the 19th century, making the problem of a radical restructuring of economic relations irrelevant, at least for the present time.

As already mentioned, the main reason for the appearance in the 19th century. such a radical socio-political doctrine as Marxism was the division of society into two antagonistic classes: the bourgeoisie and the proletariat, one of which, acting on the basis of the principle lasses faire(the principle of non-interference of the state in the economy), subjugated the other, making his life almost unbearable. The class division of society that Marx spoke about remained in the 20th century, but the severity of social contradictions between classes, or, more precisely, the subjective experience of the injustice of bourgeois economic relations on the part of the subordinate class, weakened to a significant extent. The consequence of the weakening of the severity of these experiences was the crisis of socialist and communist parties and movements in the Western world, whose political programs were based precisely on them.

The fact is that in modern Western states mechanisms have developed social protection(in particular, in the form of legally formalized labor contracts, guaranteeing a certain level of income, regulating working conditions, paying appropriate benefits to the unemployed and pensioners) and, most importantly, the standard of living of a significant part of hired workers has significantly increased. The German philosopher and sociologist Jürgen Habermas (b. 1929), analyzing the socio-economic structure of modern Western society, came to the conclusion that at present “the role of the wage earner is losing its painfully proletarian features due to the continuous rise in living standards, albeit differentiated by social strata." And therefore, in conditions when “the social state has smoothed out the severity of class contradictions ... the theory of class consciousness does not find empirical confirmation. It is no longer applicable to a society in which it is increasingly difficult to identify specific class worlds.”

Analyzing modern Western society within the framework of the Marxist paradigm and comparing it with what it was in the 19th century, it is important to understand that the antagonistic contradictions of the past did not disappear completely, but were transformed into a special dynamic social structure, one part of which is bourgeois entrepreneurial activity as the pursuit of profit , and the other is a new “class” of consumers (in fact, of course, for the most part, they are still the same hired workers), who, for the sake of preserving and, even moreover, for even more efficient functioning of a system focused primarily on profit , were admitted to the corresponding benefits (to ensure sales markets). The modern “consumer society,” with its completely defined priorities and standards, as well as the corresponding “mass culture,” are not unfortunate accidents that arose “suddenly” and “from nowhere,” but natural consequences of the immanent logic of the functioning and development of the bourgeois type of economy.

Analysis of various problems of society from the position of the economic paradigm should not be identified only with ideas that were formulated within the framework of classical political economy and Marxism. Within the framework of the leading direction of modern economic science - marginalism - quite a long time ago (at the turn of the 50-60s of the 20th century), a special direction emerged - “economic imperialism”, whose representatives are not limited to the study of such highly specialized “economic” problems, such as, for example , issues of increasing the efficiency of production of certain material goods, and uses the methodology of limit analysis to study the functioning of almost any social institutions and any forms of human behavior. The methods of economics are used to examine problems that are not traditional to economics, such as patterns of language development and church attendance, political activity, legal systems, suicide, altruism and social interaction, marriage, fertility, and divorce.

If we compare this direction with Marxism, then one certain similarity can be found here: both directions claim to be the status of a general, fundamental science of society. The difference between them is that if in Marxism the “economic approach” to society means that the organization of production plays a decisive role, predetermining the social and political structure (the base determines the superstructure, and not vice versa), then in economic imperialism the “economic approach” is the study of almost any social objects and phenomena based on two initial premises: utility maximization and stability of preferences.

In particular, according to the leading representative of “economic imperialism”, American economist Gary Becker (b. 1930), “human behavior should not be divided into any separate compartments, in one of which it is maximizing in nature, in the other it is not.” , in one it is motivated by stable preferences, in the other – by unstable ones, in one it leads to the accumulation of an optimal amount of information, in the other it does not. One might rather believe that all human behavior is characterized by participants maximizing utility under a stable set of preferences and accumulating optimal amounts of information and other resources in a variety of different markets.” Becker illustrates this point with many examples. In particular, “good health and a long life are important goals for most people, but each of us only needs a moment's reflection to see that these are not the only goals: sometimes better health or a longer life can be sacrificed because they enter into conflict with other goals. The economic approach assumes that there is an "optimal" life span at which utility additional year life is less than the utility lost as a result of using time and other resources to achieve it. Therefore, a person may be a heavy smoker or neglect physical exercise due to complete absorption in his work, and not necessarily because he is unaware of possible consequences or “incapable” of processing the information available to him, but because the segment of life that he sacrifices is of insufficient value to him to justify the costs associated with abstaining from smoking or with less strenuous work. Such decisions would be “unwise” if longevity were the only goal, but insofar as there are other goals, these decisions may turn out to be thoughtful and in this sense “prudent.” According to the economic approach, then, most deaths (if not all!) are to some extent suicides - in the sense that they could be delayed if more resources were invested in prolonging life. Not only does this provide interesting implications for the analysis of what is colloquially called suicide, but it calls into question the generally accepted distinction between suicide and “natural” deaths.”

Here is another case of Becker's rational explanation of something that, from the point of view of some, is always accompanied by some “mystery” and therefore cannot be rationally analyzed: “According to the economic approach, a person decides to marry when the expected utility of marriage exceeds the expected utility of single life or the additional costs that arise when continuing to search for a more suitable pair. Similarly, a person who is married decides to end it when the expected utility of returning to single status or entering into another marriage exceeds the utility losses associated with divorce (including due to separation from children, division of marital property, legal expenses, etc.)".

It should be noted that not all economists share the idea of ​​Becker and other representatives of “economic imperialism” about the omnipotence of the methodology of economic analysis.

At the beginning of our consideration of the economic approach to the analysis of society, it was noted that in antiquity and the Middle Ages, although problems of economic activity were touched upon, they were interpreted there in a completely different sense than in modern times: not as “purely economic” problems, for example, problems sources of the nation’s wealth and the efficiency of economic activities of certain of its subjects, but as problems that have, first of all, social and moral aspects.

Due to the noted difference between what is called “economic problems” in more or less close to us times, what was meant by this earlier, one gets the feeling that economic activity in the distant past was much less rational than it is now. This is indeed true if we evaluate it from the point of view of the criteria, principles and concepts that have arisen and are used in the conditions of modern economy. If we look at the archaic economy of antiquity and the Middle Ages from a different point of view, from the point of view of “themselves” (i.e. understand them as a special “ideal type” with its own axiomatics and problematics and the special logic of economic activity arising from them), it turns out that in these economies activity is aimed at maximizing one’s own utility no less than in modern ones, although based on completely different methods and strategies.

One of the first to turn to the analysis of the special logic of economic activity in archaic societies was the French ethnographer and sociologist Marcel Mauss (1872 - 1950). In the work “Essay on the gift. The form and basis of exchange in archaic societies" Mauss showed that in societies at a relatively low level of development, the exchange of goods is carried out through an act of donation, which only upon superficial examination may seem like a gratuitous action, but in reality is a way of organizing social unity, asserting status and prestige, a special form of subordination and obligation of the one to whom this gift is presented. The one to whom the gift is presented is obliged not only to accept it, but also to “give back” by preparing a return gift. “To refuse to give, to invite, as well as to refuse to take, is identical to a declaration of war; this means renouncing union and unification.” Considering different kinds acts of fictitious generosity, in relation not only to other people, but also to nature and the gods (sacrifice), Mauss came to the conclusion that in all these cases we're talking about about a special non-market (in the modern sense of the word), but, nevertheless, quite expedient and economically justified (but carefully hidden) strategy: “gifts to people and gods pursue ... the goal of buying peace with both.”

The French sociologist and philosopher Pierre Bourdieu (1930 – 2002), analyzing the structures of the archaic economy in his work “Practical Meaning”, came to the conclusion that, although such categories of modern economic science as “labor”, “market exchange” cannot be used in relation to it ", "capital", "credit" (because none of this in the sense that modern economic science puts into them is simply not there , those. there are neither types of exactly such activities, nor exactly such institutions), however, we can talk about their unique analogues (instead of “labor” - “work”, instead of “exchange” - “gift”, instead of “capital” and “credit” ", respectively, "symbolic capital" and "credit of fame"). In particular, there is no “labor” and “exchange” as types of activity aimed primarily at efficiency and profit because the archaic society is too poor, too dependent on nature and has at its disposal too ineffective technology. As a result, “no one there knows the difference between productive and unproductive labor, profitable and unprofitable.” In this society, due to low labor productivity, the factor of social cohesion of individuals, the willingness to help each other and join forces to achieve a common goal are of great importance for its survival. An open announcement in such a society of one's personal, selfish economic interest would be an ineffective, destructive social strategy. As Bourdieu writes, “the peculiarity of the “archaic” economy is ... that economic activity cannot explicitly recognize those economic goals in relation to which it is objectively oriented.”

As for “capital”, due to the underdevelopment of monetary circulation, as well as for the previously stated reasons, it simply cannot exist exclusively in monetary form. But it exists in a different form. According to Bourdieu, “within the framework of economics, which by definition refuses to recognize the “objective” essence of “economic” practices, i.e. the law of “naked interest” and “selfish calculation”, “economic” capital itself can act only insofar as it achieves its recognition at the cost of a transformation that makes the real principle of its functioning unrecognizable; such denied capital, recognized in its legitimacy, and therefore not recognized as capital (one of the bases for such recognition may be gratitude - in the sense of gratitude for good deeds) - this is symbolic capital, and in conditions when economic capital is not recognized, it probably, along with religious capital, forms the only possible form of accumulation.” Symbolic capital as the capital of a “good name,” honor and prestige, earned, among other things, through (at first glance) economically ruinous behavior (for example, a gift instead of a sale, certain types of “gratuitous” assistance, etc.) allows, if necessary, to accumulate significant forces of supporters and allies, in general, those who are ready to come to the rescue “at the first call.” The latter is of no small importance in the case of, for example, a short period seasonal work(harvest), war or any other exceptional event requiring a quick response. From this it is clear that symbolic capital, despite its apparent “ephemerality,” can be quite effectively converted into quite material benefits.

Bourdieu sees one of the reasons for the collapse of the structure of archaic economies (in the categories of Marxism - “relations of production”) in the process of social development in the fact that in such economies too much effort is spent on maintaining the fiction of selflessness and hiding the true one, i.e. selfish essence of economic activity. “As part of the labor of reproducing established relationships (holidays, ceremonies, exchanges of gifts, visits or signs of courtesy, and especially weddings), which is as necessary for the existence of the group as the reproduction of the economic foundations of its existence, the labor necessary to conceal the function of exchanges takes up no less a place than the labor required to perform this function.” In other words, at a relatively early stage in the development of society, when people and social groups, its components are still too weak to solve their problems individually and, thereby, also confront each other in one form or another, the archaic type of economic relations that is effective for this case dominates. If the strength becomes enough to realize your interest alone, any additional efforts to hide this begin to look like a waste of energy. The fiction of selflessness loses its original meaning and begins to be perceived simply as an unproductive waste.

Economics has the status of a scientific discipline that combines many methods of scientific and practical research.

Method of scientific abstraction or associative methods

Like any scientific discipline, for example, mathematics, in economics there are a number of generally accepted scientific abstractions, axioms, and theorems that are accepted without proof for the purposes of scientific research.

The closest option to everyday life is the theoretical justification (assumption) that every economic agent is a business, household or an individual person - a consumer - is a rationally acting subject. Those. it is assumed that an entrepreneur always strives to increase profits (which was well described in K. Marx’s work “Capital”), and that, for example, a buyer or trader on the stock market strives to make a rational decision from all options.

Despite the fact that practice also proves some irrationality of behavior (“the effect of lemmings” or crowds), scientific abstraction in economics still helps to create a set of universal models for analyzing the behavior of economic agents in a particular economic system.

Method of integration and differentiation (or method of induction and deduction)

This method is based on the study of a general phenomenon on the basis of a particular event, or vice versa, the study of a particular phenomenon on the basis of a larger one. This makes it possible to study economic systems, for example, the behavior of an individual as a consumer in the market, based on the analysis of the behavior of a group or segment of consumers (reference group analysis).

Similarly, if such methods are applied to the financial market, then judging by how the general stock exchange index behaves, certain conclusions can be drawn about how the economy of the entire country functions. Or, on the contrary, based on how the exchange rate of a particular country behaves, one can, by deduction, predict and analyze the work of a particular business - for example, study the dynamics of the balance of payments of export-import companies.

Method of historical research and analogies

In economics, as in science, the method of comparing past events with present ones is used very often. For example, all economic crises, starting with the history of tulip mania, have a certain development algorithm that is repeated in historical retrospect. This is good scientific base for research, the result of which may be the ability to predict the onset of new crises and their main parameters.

Methods of statistical information processing

Economics, as a science, deals with a huge amount of data, which includes factors in the development of large and small economic systems - from studying the dynamics of consumer preferences and the amount of lending to individual households to studying the budget parameters of a particular country.

The collection, analysis and preparation of ready-made solutions used in economics are based on statistical processing of information using special econometric models. They allow you to systematize the amount of information, filter random events and provide the researcher with a probabilistic outcome of events.

From a purely practical point of view, for example, in the financial market, a trader or investor is also studying the statistics of the number of exits of the price level of an asset (stock, bond or currency) above (below) a certain level.

Modeling processes in economics

Modeling in economics occurs in the same way as it is used in theoretical physics or mechanics, when a model of a certain complexity is created to study a process, sometimes in the form of a set of mathematical functions.

Economics uses a large arsenal of such mathematical models, ranging from Monte Carlo-type models to complex systems of hundreds of equations. Such modeling is very often used not only in macroeconomics, but also in purely practical areas, for example, in insurance, where there are special models for analyzing the occurrence of certain insurance events.

Graphical analysis methods

Since economics, as a science, deals with processes occurring in a certain space and time, the question naturally arises of the analogy of these events with cyclical or wave ones. Any economic system, be it the economy of a country as a whole, the business of an individual enterprise, or the price of a share on the stock market, develops in a certain cyclical sequence. Thus, the price of a stock cannot rise indefinitely, since the economy of any country experiences phases of growth and decline (crises). Accordingly, graphic-analytical methods are used for such cyclic (wave) analysis.

home » Investments » Types of economic systems. Approaches in economic theory. Economic approach to human behavior G.S. Becker Method of scientific abstraction or associative methods