Abstracts
Abstract
Development is a concept whose ontological foundations are include phenomena, such as technologies, institutions, and cultural traits that embody the determinants of development differentials. This contribution argues that semiotics is the science to study these complex phenomena of development. Its approach is based on Charles Sanders Peirce’s semiotics and John Searle’s analysis of social reality. Development trajectories are depicted as specific compounds of institutions (signs), technologies (objects), and markets (interpretants) that create meaningful properties depending on symbolic forms. Development is a socially structured and observer-relative phenomenon. Developmental semiosis depends upon symbolic powers that structure and assemble collective intentionality. The paper advances two critical conditions essential to development. The first is semiotic intra-coherence, which is related with the bridging of dispositional functions in a coordinated way in networks of artifacts and users. The second is inter-coherence. It takes place as the supervenient causality of social structures and the performative character of habitual patterns of behavior. Both are intertwined in syntactic and semantic forms evolving in time by forging the development of path-dependent trajectories.
Keywords:
- Economics,
- Semiotics,
- Development,
- Social Ontology,
- Collective Intentionality
Résumé
Le développement est un concept dont les fondements ontologiques incluent des phénomènes tels que les technologies, les institutions et les traits culturels qui incarnent les déterminants des différentiels de développement. Cette contribution soutient que la sémiotique est la science pour étudier ces phénomènes complexes de développement. Son approche s’appuie sur la sémiotique de Charles Sanders Peirce et sur l’analyse de la réalité sociale de John Searle. Les trajectoires de développement sont décrites comme des composés spécifiques d’institutions (signes), de technologies (objets) et de marchés (interprétants) qui créent des propriétés significatives en fonction de formes symboliques. Le développement est un phénomène socialement structuré et relatif à l’observateur. La sémiosis développementale dépend des pouvoirs symboliques qui structurent et assemblent l’intentionnalité collective. Le document met en avant deux conditions critiques essentielles au développement. Le premier est l’intra-cohérence sémiotique, qui est liée au rapprochement des fonctions dispositionnelles de manière coordonnée dans les réseaux d’artefacts et d’utilisateurs. La seconde est l’intercohérence. Elle prend place comme la causalité survenante des structures sociales et le caractère performatif des schémas de comportement habituels. L’un et l’autre s’imbriquent dans des formes syntaxiques et sémantiques évoluant dans le temps en forgeant le développement de trajectoires dépendantes du chemin.
Mots-clés :
- Économie,
- sémiotique,
- développement,
- ontologie sociale,
- intentionnalité collective
Appendices
Bibliography
- ACEMOGLU, D., and ROBINSON, J. A. (2012) Why Nations Fail : The Origins of Power, Prosperity, and Poverty. New York, NY : Crown.
- BRIER, S. (2008) “The Paradigm of Peircean Biosemiotics”. In Signs (2)1 : 20-81.
- CHOMSKY, N. (1965) Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. Cambridge, MA : MIT Press.
- CLARK, A. (2011) Supersizing the Mind : Embodiment, Action, and Cognitive Extension. Oxford : Oxford University Press.
- COBLEY, P., and RANDIVIIR, A. (2009) “What is Social Semiotics?” In Semiotica (173)1 : 1-39.
- DAMASIO, A. (2018) The Strange Order of Things : Life, Feeling, and the Making of Cultures. New York, NY : Pantheon.
- DEFALVARD H. (2005) “Pragmatisme et institutionnalisme en économie une voie oubliée”. In Revue de métaphysique et de morale (47)3 : 375-389.
- DENNETT, D.C. (2017) From Bacteria to Bach and Back : The Evolution of Minds. New York, NY : Norton.
- DOPFER, K., and POTTS, J. (2004) “Evolutionary Realism : a New Ontology for Economics”. In Journal of Economic Methodology (11)2 : 195-212.
- FURUBOTN, E.G., and RICHTER, R. (2005) Institutions and Economic Theory : The Contribution of the New Institutional Economics, 2nd ed. Ann Arbor, MI : University of Michigan Press.
- FOSTER, J. (1997) “The Analytical Foundations of Evolutionary Economics : From Biological Analogy to Economic Self-Organisation”. In Structural Change and Economic Dynamics (8)1 : 427-451.
- GRINBERG, M. (2001) “Un cheval est-il un cheval? Les mots, les faits, le capitalism et le droit”. In Cahiers d’économie politique (40)1 : 177-89.
- HERRMANN-PILLATH, C. (2001) “On the Ontological Foundations of Evolutionary Economics”. In Evolutionary Economics : Program and Scope. Recent Economic Thought Series, K. Dopfer (Ed.), Dordrecht : Springer : 89-139.
- HERRMANN-PILLATH, C. (2013) Foundations of Economic Evolution. Cheltenham : Edward Elgar Publishing.
- HODGSON, G.M. (2002) “Darwinism in Economics : From Analogy to Ontology”. In Journal of Evolutionary Economics 12(1) : 259-281.
- HODGSON, G.M. (2007) “Evolutionary and Institutional Economics as the New Mainstream?” In Evolutionary and Institutional Economic Review (4)1 : 7-25.
- HODGSON, G.M., and KNUDSON, T. (2010) Darwin’s Conjecture : The Search for General Principles of Social And Economic Evolution. Chicago, IL : University of Chicago Press.
- HUTCHINS, E. (1995) Cognition in the Wild. Cambridge, MA : MIT Press.
- LATOUR, B. (2005) Reassembling the Social : An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory. Oxford : Oxford University Press.
- MACEDO, L.O.B., and HERRMANN-PILLATH, C. (2019) “Towards a Semiotic Theory of the Corporation”. In Social Semiotics publ. online, 16 Jun, 10.1080/10350330.2019.1629530.
- McGILLIVRA, M., and WHITHE, H. (1993) “Measuring Development? The UNDP’s Human Development Index”. In Journal of International Development (5)2 : 183-192.
- MARRAIS, J. (2019) “What Development Stand For? A Socio-Semiotic Conceptualization”. In Social Semiotics (29)1 : 15-28.
- MEIER, G.M., and STIGLITZ, J. (Eds.) (2000) Frontiers of Development Economics : The Future in Perspective. New York, NY : World Bank and Oxford University Press.
- MÉNARD, C., and SHIRLEY, M.M. (Eds.) (2008) Handbook of New Institutional Economics. Berlin : Springer.
- NELSON, R.R. (2002) “Bringing Institutions into Evolutionary Growth Theory”. In Social Institutions and Economic Development. V. FitzGerald (Ed.). Dordrecht : Springer : 9-21.
- NELSON, R.R. (2008) “Economic Development from the Perspective of Evolutionary Economic Theory”. In Oxford Development Studies (36)1 : 9-21.
- NELSON, R.R., and WINTER, S.G. (1982) Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change. Cambridge, MA : Harvard University Press.
- NORTH, D.C. (1990) Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press.
- NORTH, D.C. (1995) “The New Institutional Economics and Third World Development”. In the New Institutional Economics and the Third World Development, J. Harris, J. Hunter, & C.M. Lewis (Eds), London : Routledge : 17-26.
- NORTH, D.C. Understanding the Process of Economic Change. Princeton, NJ : Princeton University Press.
- OLIVEIRA, C. de (2018) “The Right to Kill : Should Brazil Keep its Amazon Tribes from Taking the Lives of their Children?” In Foreign Affairs, April 9. Available at : https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/04/09/the-right-to-kill-brazil-infanticide/ (accessed October 2020).
- POTTS, J. (2007) “Evolutionary Institutional Economics”. In Journal of Economic Issues (41)2 : 341-350.
- RANSDELL, J. (1977) “Some Leading Ideas of Peirce’s Semiotics”. In Semiotica (19)1 : 157-178.
- REYNOLDS, A. (2002) Peirce’s Scientific Metaphysics : The Philosophy of Chance, Law, and Evolution. Nashville, TN : Vanderbilt University Press.
- SEARLE, J.R. (1995) The Construction of Social Reality. New York, NY : Free Press.
- SEARLE, J.R. (2004) Mind : A Brief Introduction. Oxford : Oxford University Press.
- SEN, A. (1999) Development as Freedom. New York, NY : Alfred Knopf.
- SHORT, T.L. (2007) Peirce’s Theory of Signs. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press.
- STERELNY, K. (2004) “Externalism, Epistemic Artefacts and The Extended Mind”. In The Externalist Challenge, R. Schantz (Ed.), Berlin : de Gruyter : 239-254.
- RAMSTAD, Y. (1994) “On the Nature of Economic Evolution : John R. Commons and the Metaphor of Artificial Selection”. In Evolutionary and Neo-Schumpeterian Approaches to Economics, L. Magnusson (Ed.), Boston, MA: Kluwer : 65-121.
- VEBLEN, T.B. (1898) “Why Is Economics Not an Evolutionary Science?” In Quarterly Journal of Economics (12)3 : 373–97.
- VEBLEN, T.B. ([1899] 1994) The Theory of the Leisure Class. New York, NY : Penguin.
- VROMEN, J.J. (1995) Economic Evolution : An Enquiry into the Foundations of New Institutional Economics. London : Routledge.
- VROMEN, J. (2004) “Conjectural Revisionary Economic Ontology: Outline of an Ambitious Research Agenda for Evolutionary Economics”. In Journal of Economic Methodology (11)2 : 213-247.
- WILLIAMSON, O. (1985) The Economic Institutions of Capitalism : Firms, Markets, Relational Contracting. New York, NY : The Free Press.
- WITT, U. (1997) “Self-Organization and Economics – What Is New?” In Structural Change and Economic Dynamics (8)1 : 489-507.
- WITT, U. (1999) “Bioeconomics as Economics from a Darwinian Perspective”. In Journal of Bioeconomics (1)1 : 19-34.