Skip to main content

Biology—A Colleague or a Model?

  • Chapter
Dionysian Economics
  • 350 Accesses

Abstract

What is a chapter on biology doing at this point in the book? Well there are two things that make it relevant. We have rejected physics as a model of how to do economics, on the one hand, and we’ve been claiming that economics can become a scientific discipline, on the other hand. So the point of this chapter is to suggest that there is in fact another way to do science, and that biology offers insight as to how that may be done in economics. There is some debris to clear up before we get to the main argument, and so we ask for some patience from the reader. However, one major similarity can be noticed before we start: The extraordinary diversity of the set of living creatures and the extraordinary complexity of the simplest among them, the single-cell bacterium, looks a lot more like the extraordinary diversity and complexity of the permeable human than do either to a physicists particle.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. The physics text is David Halliday, Robert Resnick, and Jearl Walker, Fundamentals of Physics (New York: Wiley, 2005); the biology text is

    Google Scholar 

  2. Scott Freeman, Biological Science (Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson, 2005); and the economics texts are

    Google Scholar 

  3. Gregory Mankiw, Principles of Economics, 6th ed. (Mason, OH: Southwestern, 2012) and

    Google Scholar 

  4. Paul Krugman and Robin Wells, Economics, 3rd ed. (New York: Worth, 2013). The latter two are both very popular and roughly cover the mainline political spectrum in the field.

    Google Scholar 

  5. The group established the International Encyclopedia of Unified Science, which only managed to publish a single work, Thomas Kuhn’s Structure of Scientific Revolutions (1962).

    Google Scholar 

  6. See Benjamin Ward, What’s Wrong with Economics? (New York: Basic Books, 1972) for an application of ideas from this seminal work to economics.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  7. Terrell L. Hill, An Introduction to Statistical Thermodynamics, 2nd ed. (New York: Dover, 1986), discusses the heat-exchange equation and the additional term to characterize diffusion.

    Google Scholar 

  8. See Ken Dill and Sarina Bromberg, Molecular Driving Forces, Statistical Thermodynamics in Biology, Chemistry, Physics and Nanoscience, 2nd ed. (London: Garland Science, 2011), 317–20.

    Google Scholar 

  9. The following account is put together from Freeman (2005), ch. 10; and Thomas Pollard and William Earnshaw, Cell Biology, 2nd ed. (Philadelphia: Saunders/Elsevier, 2008), 337–45.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Fraud and failure have reached the level of serious scandal in the sciences. A recent article in Science, “Shaking Up Science” (vol. 339, January 25, 2013) has two scientific journal editors, Ferric Fang and Arturo Casadevall, questioning researcher honesty; a year later Science published a study by Annie Franco, Neil Malhotra, and Gabor Simonovits, “Publication Bias in the Social Sciences,” Science 345 (2014): 1502–4, showing a strong bias toward publishing strong results over neutral or merely confirming ones. Clinical trials have come under challenge (New York Times, July 14, 2013, by Clifton Leaf), as have the very popular study of studies (“Analytical Trend Troubles Scientists,” Wall Street Journal, May 3, 2012, by Gautam Naik). Ioannides’ work is referenced in the above reports. The list could be extended, but generally shows that pressures to compromise results come with respect to motives at several levels, including researchers, peer reviews, and grants agencies.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Martin Nowak, C. Tarnita, and E. O. Wilson, “The Evolution of Eusociality” Nature 466 (August 2010): 1057–62. In its online report, Nature claims one hundred fifty challengers to their thesis.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. See also Samuel Bowles and Herbert Gintis, A Cooperative Species (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University, 2011) for an attempt to have it both ways, which might just work.

    Book  Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Copyright information

© 2016 Benjamin Ward

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Ward, B. (2016). Biology—A Colleague or a Model?. In: Dionysian Economics. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137597366_15

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics