09.07.2015 Views

Subjectivism and Economic Analysis: Essays in memory of Ludwig ...

Subjectivism and Economic Analysis: Essays in memory of Ludwig ...

Subjectivism and Economic Analysis: Essays in memory of Ludwig ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

STEPHEN D.PARSONSfrom the contents <strong>of</strong> consciousness. Lachmann’s problem heresurfaces <strong>in</strong> an ambiguity concern<strong>in</strong>g the notion <strong>of</strong> ‘orientation’. Inthe above, <strong>in</strong>stitutions serve as ‘orientation maps’ which,presumably, must be taken account <strong>of</strong> by any <strong>in</strong>dividual whenformulat<strong>in</strong>g a plan. However, Lachmann also argues that:‘Orientation entails plan. A plan has to conta<strong>in</strong> a comprehensiveaccount <strong>of</strong> ends, means, <strong>and</strong> obstacles to which a course <strong>of</strong> action isorientated’ (ibid.: 38).This appears to suggest that orientation is only possible through,<strong>and</strong> because <strong>of</strong>, the formation <strong>of</strong> a plan. ‘Plann<strong>in</strong>g’ thus allowsorientation to ends, means <strong>and</strong> obstacles to occur:What we may hope to accomplish here is to be able to show towhat ends, means, <strong>and</strong> obstacles human action is orientated.Orientation thus emerges as a concept as fundamental topraxeological study as determ<strong>in</strong>ateness to natural science.(ibid.: 37)However, if a plan provides a form <strong>of</strong> horizon that enables anorientation to means, ends <strong>and</strong> obstacles, how do we first becomeaware <strong>of</strong>, <strong>and</strong> thus orientate ourselves towards, certa<strong>in</strong> possibleends, means, <strong>and</strong> obstacles? Lachmann appears to neglect theconsideration <strong>of</strong> the context with<strong>in</strong> which plans are formulated.Aga<strong>in</strong>, this can be contrasted to Weber:Weber differentiates the concept <strong>of</strong> practical rationality fromthe three perspectives <strong>of</strong> employ<strong>in</strong>g means, sett<strong>in</strong>g ends, <strong>and</strong>be<strong>in</strong>g orientated to values. The <strong>in</strong>strumental rationality <strong>of</strong> anaction is measured by effective plann<strong>in</strong>g <strong>of</strong> the application <strong>of</strong>means for given ends; the rationality <strong>of</strong> choice <strong>of</strong> an action ismeasured by the correctness <strong>of</strong> the calculation <strong>of</strong> ends <strong>in</strong> thelight <strong>of</strong> precisely conceived values, available means, <strong>and</strong>boundary conditions; <strong>and</strong> the normative rationality <strong>of</strong> anaction is measured by the unify<strong>in</strong>g, systematiz<strong>in</strong>g power <strong>and</strong>penetration <strong>of</strong> the value st<strong>and</strong>ards <strong>and</strong> the pr<strong>in</strong>ciples thatunderlie action preferences.(Habermas 1984:172)It is some underst<strong>and</strong><strong>in</strong>g <strong>of</strong> what is here referred to as the‘orientation to values’ that appears miss<strong>in</strong>g from Lachmann’saccount. Consequently, a hiatus between the <strong>in</strong>dividual actor <strong>and</strong>the <strong>in</strong>stitutional context with<strong>in</strong> which plans are formulated appears.54

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!