Main trends of research in the social and human ... - unesdoc - Unesco

300 Economics
historical conditions does not provide any excuse for not examining their
validity.
Man almost invariably hds that the means available are inadequate in rela-
tion to the objectives he has set himself. The optimum use of scarce means is
theoretically stated in the so-called principle of economic rationality, which has
two variants: the attempt to secure maximum effect with the means available, or
the attempt to minimize the means which must be expended to attain a given end.
It is a principle which applies in the most varied aspects of social life, in tech-
nology, military activities, medicine (e.g. during a surgical operation), sport,
scientific research, and so on. The Robbins view of economics, therefore, would
mean treating economics as if it were some universal science of human action,
and economists would be quite unable to do what would accordingly be expect-
ed of them. Robbins, it will be remembered, maintained that the production of
potatoes and philosophical creation were equally the subject-matter of econom-
ics. He was later frequently involved in potato production problems but never
had any occasion to give advice on production methods as applied to philosophy.
His definition of economics does not take account of reality. He does not gener-
alize from the way in which economics in fact develops while, on the other hand,
imposing on economists functions they are in no position to fulfil. Moreover, to
extend the r61e of economics in this way would preclude any ‘reasonable clas-
sification of sciences’, as another science, other than economics, is developing
which is endeavouring to create ‘a general theory of efficient action’.=’
Praxiology is of course still very recent, but it is solidly based, with its own
aims and concepts, definite enough to oblige the economist-methodologist to
take account of its existence.
But, according to the specialists, praxiology cannot even incorporate in their
original form the norms of economic rationality since they are formulated on a
considerably lower level of abstraction than those of the general theory of effi-
cient action. ‘As praxiological ones are more general and economic ones more
particular, it is obvious that praxiological theses are drawn from economical ones
by induction but economic theses spring from praxiological ones by deduction.
A praxiologist makes use of the partial generalizations provided by economists,
and integrates them with partial generalizations provided by specialists in other
areas of activity; he formulates generalizations of a wider application, hypothet-
ical theses to be proved in the whole area of various fields of conscious human
actions.. . Economics provides praxiology with a great richness of semiproducts
so to speak, to which praxiology gives a finish’.z8
Thus, the very feature which, in the opinion of von Mises, makes economics
the best developed branch of praxiology, is regarded by the praxiologist as a
hindrance which prevents the simple treatment of economic theses as part of a
more general science i.e., praxiology,
In the light of this opinion, it is clear that economics can be regarded neither
as a branch of praxiology nor as a general theory of rational economic activ-
ity.
However, although the ‘praxiological conception of economics’ seems to be
untenable, the usefulness of applying praxiological modes of thinking to eco-