We're back to the question of "Which came first the chicken or the egg?" Since both the chicken and the egg exist neither can be denied but didn't one come first?
Since entrepreneurship exists and since disequilibrium exists neither can be denied. It is possible that disequilibrium was first discovered by the entrepreneur and it is also possible that the entrepreneur's action caused disequilibrium.
However, and perhaps Schumpeter went astray at this point, the consumer is sovereign. This is the key to understanding which comes first. All value ultimately comes from subjective valuation and all things have value because people value things.
What do you call an entrepreneurial action that causes disequilibrium but that nobody values or wants? First of all it is wasteful so in that sense it is destructive and it may even be 'creative' but it is the antithesis of economic.
As you can see, following the erroneous pathway of 'creative destruction' as the cause in a cause and effect analysis leads to something less than economic analysis. Schumpeter was 'creative' but he left praxeology behind and lost his way.
For more information go to my website http://www.divineeconomyconsulting.com/.
To earn a Masters Degree in Divine Economy Theory go here.
No comments:
Post a Comment