Self-organisation in biology and economics takes different paths, with natural selection and market dynamics driving the respective fields. Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution posits that random mutation and natural selection enable species to adapt to their environment, leading to the survival of the fittest. Conversely, Adam Smith’s economic theory suggests that individual self-interest and competition in a free market lead to economic prosperity.
While both theories champion self-organisation, they diverge in their views on competition. In biology, competition is brutal and zero-sum, with winners surviving and losers dying out. In economics, competition can be mutually beneficial, with both parties gaining from trade.
Moreover, the role of randomness in evolution is not mirrored in economics. Random mutation is a key driver of biological diversity, but in economics, innovation is often deliberate and targeted.
Lastly, the feedback loops in biology and economics differ. In biology, feedback is negative, with successful adaptations becoming widespread until they are no longer advantageous. In economics, feedback can be positive, with successful products or services becoming more popular and profitable.
In conclusion, despite apparent similarities, the self-organisation principles in biology and economics are fundamentally different, reflecting the unique characteristics of the natural and economic worlds.
Go to source article: http://bigthink.com/errors-we-live-by/self-organization-in-biology-vs-economics-darwin-vs-smith