Changes in Models of Economic Agent and Economic Space
https://doi.org/10.21686/2413-2829-2025-2-13-24
Abstract
The article analyzes characteristics of homo economicus model and space, where it functions. Principles underlying this quasi-natural scientific model are explained in view of physicalism. Arguments are also provided that allow us to make a conclusion about changing requirements to economic agent in institutional economy. Therefore, from the natural scientific position a hypothesis is advanced that new characteristics of agent can be taxonomically included in economic theory to illustrate the actor’s development. Apart from that a conclusion is drawn about the necessity of additional notions concerning space, where economic agent can be defined. The authors provide arguments in favor of the fact that it is impossible to define utterly the agent of economy and space of its functioning by using metaphors only of natural science. A hypothesis was put forward that models of space and agent shall be supplemented by social properties. With regard to these supplements definitions of such notions as formal and informal institutes, organizations are advanced. And finally a conclusion was made about the limited use of physicalism in economics.
About the Authors
M. Yu. Churilin
Institute of Economics of the RAS
Russian Federation
Maxim Yu. Churilin - Post-Graduate Student of the IE RAS, Center for Methodological and Historical-Economic Research, Branch of Philosophy and Methodology of Economic Science
Russian Federation
Maxim Yu. Churilin - Post-Graduate Student of the IE RAS, Center for Methodological and Historical-Economic Research, Branch of Philosophy and Methodology of Economic Science
32 Nakhimovsky Avenue, Moscow, 117218
T. A. Valiulina
Moscow State Linguistic University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Tatiana A. Valiulina PhD, Assistant Professor of the Department of Linguistics and Professional Communication in Mediatechnologies at the Institute of International Relations and Socio-Political Sciences
38 Ostozhenka Str., Moscow, 119034
References
1. Boltanski L., Chiapello E. Noviy duh kapitalizma [New Spirit of Capitalism], translated from French under the general editorship by S. Fokin. Moscow, New Literature Review, 2011. (In Russ.).
2. Burde P. Sotsiologiya sotsialnogo prostranstva [Sociology of Social Space]. Saint Petersburg, Aleteyya, 2007. (In Russ.).
3. Weblen T. Teoriya prazdnogo klassa [Theory of Idle Class], translated from English. Moscow, Progress, 1984. (In Russ.).
4. Gubbyeva Z. O., Kashirin A. Yu., Shlapakova N. A. Kontseptsiya sovremennogo estestvoznaniya [The Concept of Today’s Natural Science]. Tula, Publication of the Tula State L. N. Tolstoy Pedagogical University, 2001. (In Russ.).
5. Kapelyushnikov R. I. Kto takoy Homo oeconomicus? [Who is Homo Economicus?]. Ekonomicheskaya politika [Economic Policy], 2020, Vol. 15, No. 1, pp. 8–39. (In Russ.).
6. Koshovets O. B., Varhotov T. A. Naturalizatsiya predmeta ekonomiki: ot pogoni za estestvenno-nauchnymi standartami k obladaniyu zakonami prirody [Naturalization of Economy Subject: from Chasing Natural Science Standards to Possessing Laws of Nature]. Filosofsko-literaturniy zhurnal «Logos» [Philosophic and Literature Journal ‘Logos’], 2020, No. 3 (136), pp. 21–54. (In Russ.).
7. Lebedev S. A. Nauchnaya kartina mira v ee razvitii [Scientific View of the World in its Development]. Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta. Ser. 7. Filosofiya [Bulletin of the Moscow University. Series 7. Philosophy], 2012, No. 3, pp. 3–29. (In Russ.).
8. Lozina O. I., Tutov L. A. Opportunisticheskoe povedenie i konkurentosposobnost rabotnika v sovremennoy organizatsii [Opportunistic Behavior and Competitiveness of Worker in Today’s Organization]. Nauchnye issledovaniya ekonomicheskogo fakulteta: elektronniy zhurnal [Academic Research of the Economics Faculty: E-Journal], 2019, Vol. 11, Issue 1, pp. 21–29. (In Russ.).
9. Markuze G. Odnomerniy chelovek. Issledovanie ideologii razvitogo industrialnogo obshchestva [1-D Man. Researching Ideology of Developed Industrialized Society], translated from English. Moscow, AST, 2003. (In Russ.).
10. Menar K. Ekonomika organizatsiy [Economics of Organization]. Moscow, Infra-M, 1996. (In Russ.).
11. Orekhovskiy P. A. Innovatsionnaya ekonomika v svete teorii neyavnogo kontrakta [Innovation Economy in View of Vague Contract]. Obshchestvo i ekonomika [Society and Economy], 2011, No. 3, pp. 5–35. (In Russ.).
12. Saimon G. Ratsionalnost kak protsess i produkt myshleniya [Rationality as Process and Product of Thinking]. THESIS, 1993, Vol. 1, Issue 3, pp. 17–38. (In Russ.).
13. Smith A. Teoriya nravstvennyh chuvstv [Theory of Moral Feelings]. Moscow, Republic, 1997. (In Russ.).
14. Stepin V. S. Teoreticheskoe znanie [Theoretical Knowledge]. Moscow, ProgressTradition, 2000. (In Russ.).
15. Tambovtsev V. L. Metodologiya empiricheskogo analiza neformalnyh institutov [Methodology of Empiric Analysis of Informal Institutes]. Journal of Institutional Studies, 2020, No. 3, pp. 6–23. (In Russ.).
16. Williamson O. I. Povedencheskie predposylki sovremennogo ekonomicheskogo analiza [Economic Preconditions of Current Economic Analysis]. THEISIS, 1993, Vol. 1, Issue 3, pp. 39–49. (In Russ.).
17. Williamson O. I. Ekonomicheskie instituty kapitalizma. Firmy, rynki i «otnoshencheskaya» kontraktatsiya [Economic Institutions of Capitalism. Firms, Markets and ‘Relation’ Contracting], translated from English. Saint Petersburg, Lenizdat, 1996. (In Russ.).
18. Feinman R., Leiton R., Sends M. Feynmanovskie lektsii po fizike [Feinman’s Lectures on Physics]. Vol. 6. Elektrodinamika [Electro-Dynamics], translated from English, 3th edition. Moscow, Editorial URSS, 2004. (In Russ.).
19. Frolov D. P. Metaforizm institutsionalizma: fizikalizm vs biologizm [Metaphorism of Institutionalism: Physicalism vs Biologism]. Prostranstvo ekonomiki [Economy Space], 2013, No. 3, pp. 34–51. (In Russ.).
20. Hodzhson D. Ekonomicheskaya teoriya i instituty: manifest sovremennoy institutsionalnoy ekonomicheskoy teorii [Economic Theory and Institutions: Manifest of Current Institutional Economic Theory], translated from English. Moscow, Delo, 2003. (In Russ.).
21. Shcherbakov I. V. Motivatsiya ekonomicheskoy deyatelnosti cheloveka: napravleniya povysheniya effektivnosti [Motivation of Economic Activity of Person: Trends of Efficiency Raising]. Gosudarstvennoe upravlenie: elektronniy vestnik [State Administration: E-Bulletin], 2017, No. 64, pp. 377–388. (In Russ.).
22. Etkinz P. Desyat velikih idey nauki. Kak ustroen nash mir [Ten Great Ideas of Science. How our World is Built]. Moscow, AST: Astrel, 2008. (In Russ.).
23. Lindenberg S. An Assessment of the New Political Economy: Its Potential for the Social Sciences and for Sociology in Particular. Sociological Theory, 1985, Vol. 3, No. 1, pp. 99–114.
24. North D. C. Economic Performance through Time. American Economic Review, 1994, No. 84 (3), pp. 359–368.
25. Sebba G. The Development of the Concepts of Mechanism and Model in Physical Science and Economic Thought. American Economic Review, Papers and Proceedings, 1953, Vol. 43, pp. 259–268.
26. Thoben H. Mechanistic and Organistic Analogies in Economics Considered. Kyklos, 1982, No. 35 (2), pp. 292–306.
Review
For citations:
Churilin M.Yu., Valiulina T.A. Changes in Models of Economic Agent and Economic Space. Vestnik of the Plekhanov Russian University of Economics. 2025;(2):13-24. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.21686/2413-2829-2025-2-13-24
Views:
63
Email this article 