² Bridgman, P. W., The Nature of Physical Theory (Princeton, 1936), p. 2 Google Scholar.

³ Weisskopf, W. A., “Psychological Aspects of Economic Thought,” Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 57, p. 306 (1949)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁴ See my “The Problem of Order in Economic Affairs,” Southern Economic Journal, Vol. 15, pp. 1 ff. (1948)CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Certain epistemological aspects of economic analysis are treated in this paper. But upon this subject see Northrop, F. S. C., The Logic of the Sciences and the Humanities (New York, 1947)Google Scholar.

⁵ See Whitehead, A. N., Process and Reality (New York, 1941), p. 22 Google Scholar.

⁶ On the subject of this paragraph seen Leontief, W., “Note on the Pluralistic Interpretation of History and the Problem of Interdisciplinary Cooperation,” Journal of Philosophy, Vol. 45, pp. 617–624 (1948)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Murdock, G. P., “The Science of Human Learning, Society, Culture, and Personality,” Scientific Monthly, Vol. 69, pp. 377–381 (1949)Google Scholar.

⁷ The study of vision, issuing out of earlier gestalt-interpretations, is quite suggestive in this connection; it indicates that vision is selective as to its object, and that what is seen is significantly conditioned by past experience and expectation.

⁸ In 1949 the Social Science Research Council sponsored a series of interdiscipline seminars on the content and role of values.

⁹ See Samuelson, P. A., Foundations of Economic Analysis (Cambridge, 1947)Google Scholar; Hicks, J. R., Value and Capital (Oxford, 1948)Google Scholar; Parsons, T., The Structure of Social Action (New York, 1937), Ch. 19Google Scholar; and Northrop, op. cit. For a review of materials relating to economic change see Problems in the Study of Economic Growth (New York, 1949)Google ScholarPubMed, issued by the National Bureau of Economic Research. On the applicability of the concept of entropy in economics see my “Aspects of the Economics of Population Growth,” Southern Economic Journal, Vol. 14, pp. 238–239 (1948)Google Scholar. The notion of “novelty" has been treated by A. N. Whitehead in various of his works.

¹⁰ Most of man's behavior, being future-facing, is dominated by expectations. But these expectations are diverse in nature. For example, the entrepreneur (and all others in so far as they resemble the entrepreneur) acts on suppositions respecting the stability of institutions, the integrity and responsibility of those with whom he deals, the probability of continuity-breaking events such as war, the course of business in general and in his own industry in the months ahead, and the prospects of his own firm. In the text above we refer principally to an entrepreneur's suppositions respecting business in general, his industry, and his firm. Of especial interest in this connection are the studies of G. Katona and the inquiries being conducted by F. Modigliani. See also Cowles Commission, Report, 1948–1949, pp. 6 ff.Google Scholar

¹¹ See Arrow, K. J., Social Choice and Individual Value, Cowles Commission Discussion Paper No. 258, Chicago, 1949 Google Scholar; Reder, M. W., Studies in the Theory of Welfare Economics (New York, 1947)Google Scholar; P. A. Samuelson, op. cit., and “Evaluation of Real National Income,” Oxford Economic Papers, Vol. 2, 1950, pp. 1 ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and the papers by I. M. D. Little appearing in ibid., pp. 132 ff. and Vol. 1, 1949, pp. 90 ff., 227 ff. For an appraisal of Lerner's interesting defense of income-equality, see Friedman, M., “Lerner on the Economics of Control,” Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 55, pp. 409 ff. (1947)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

¹² See Lewin, K., A Dynamic Theory of Personality (New York, 1935), Chs. 6, 8Google Scholar; Hull, C. L., “Value, Valuation, and Methodology,” Philosophy of Science, Vol. 1, pp. 128 ff. (1944)Google Scholar; Kluokhohn, C. and Murray, H. A., Personality in Nature, Society, and Culture (New York, 1949), Ch. 1Google Scholar; Sargent, S. S. and Smith, M. W., Culture and Personality (New York, 1949)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

¹³ On limitations to substitutability see Noyes, C. R., Economic Man (New York, 1948), e. g., pp. 866–867, 884–885 Google Scholar.

¹⁴ On consumer sovereignty and freedom of choice and related issues, see A. Bergson's essay in Ellis, H. S., A Survey of Contemporary Economics (Philadelphia, 1948), pp. 412 ff.Google Scholar

¹⁵ See Dobzhansky, T. and Montagu, M. F. Ashley, “Natural Selection and the Mental Capacities of Mankind,” Science, Vol. 105, pp. 587–590 (1947)CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed, and Knight, F. H., “Free Society: Its Basic Nature and Problem,” Philosophical Review, Vol. 57, pp. 39–58 (1948)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

¹⁶ On the influence of historical development upon the formation of personality types see Kardiner, A., The Psychological Frontiers of Society (New York, 1945)Google Scholar; also the last two works cited in note 12 and Murphy, G., Personality (New York, 1947)Google ScholarPubMed.

¹⁷ Cp. A. N. Whitehead's argument in another connection in Adventures of Ideas (New York, 1933), pp. 255 ff.Google ScholarPubMed

¹⁸ Sumner, W. G., Folkways (Boston, 1906), pp. 5–6 Google Scholar.

¹⁹ Integration, change, etc., in primitive cultures have been treated with precision by Murdock, G. P., Social Structure (New York, 1949), esp. Chs. 7–8Google Scholar.

²⁰ On this point see Merton, R. K., Social Theory and Social Structure (Glencoe, 1949), pp. 51, 122, 179 Google Scholar. On unpredictability in the societal realm see also Northrop, op. cit., pp. 115 ff., 235 ff., and my “The Role of the State,” Journal of Economic History, Vol. 7, Supplement 7, pp. 139 ff. (1947)Google Scholar.

²¹ See R. K. Merton, ibid., esp. Parts I–II; T. Parsons, The Structure of Social Action, op. cit., and Essays in Sociological Theory Pure and Applied (Glencoe, 1949)Google Scholar; Centers, R., The Psychology of Social Classes (Princeton, 1949)Google Scholar, and (with H. Cantril) “Income Satis-faction and Income Aspiration,” Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, Vol. 41, pp. 64–69 (1946)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

²² See Arrow, op. cit.

²³ On the incentive problem see Moore, W. E., “Theoretical Aspects of Industrialization,” Social Research, Vol. 15, pp. 277 ff. (1948)Google Scholar, and papers there cited. On the use of various social sciences in the study of labor relations see, e.g., Warner, W. L., “Social Science in Business Education,” in Cox, G. V. (ed.), The Challenge of Business Education, (Chicago, 1949)Google Scholar, and Ross, Earl, Trade Union Wage Policy (Berkeley, 1948)Google Scholar.

²⁴ E.g., see Parsons, Essays, op. cit., pp. 231, 247.

²⁵ Ibid., pp. 22 ff., 34 ff., 44 ff.; Merton, op. tit., Ch. 1, esp. pp. 49–55, 115–119. On limitations to the variability of distribution and structures see Zipi, G. K., Human Behavior and the Principle of Least Effort (Cambridge, 1949)Google Scholar. A good bibliography is included. See also Cattell, R. B., “The Dimensions of Culture Patterns by Factorization of National Characters,” Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, Vol. 44, pp. 443 ff. (1949)CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed.

²⁶ See Parsons, Structure of Social Action, op. cit., pp. 760 ff.

²⁷ Cp. Usher, A. P., “The Significance of Modern Empiricism for History and Economics,” Journal of Economic History, Vol. 9, pp. 137–155 (1949)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

²⁸ On this and related matters see Arrow, op. cit., and Black, Duncan, “On the Rationale of Group Decision-making,” Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 56, pp. 23 ff. (1948)CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and “The Elasticity of Committee Decisions with an Altering Size of Majority,” Economelrica, Vol. 16, pp. 262 ff. (1948)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

²⁹ See Chamberlin, E., The Theory of Monopolistic Competition (Cambridge, 1938)Google Scholar, Appendix C. Chamberlin's thesis is an extension of H. Hotelling's.

³⁰ While this is not the place to review the history of the political scientists' treatment of “power,” it may be noted that twenty years ago II. Heller made “political power” the core concept of political science, yet declared it impossible for its practitioners to give it precise content (“Political Science,” Encyclopaedia of the Social Sciences, Vol. 12, pp. 207, 209)Google ScholarPubMed. The role of power was variously treated in the course of a controversy that appeared in the American Political Science Review several years ago; Whyte, W. F., “A Challenge to Political Scientists,” Vol. 137, pp. 692–697 (1943)Google Scholar, calling for the study and interpretation of political behavior in terms of social structure; a reply by Hallowell, J. H., “Politics and Ethics,” Vol. 38, pp. 639–659 (1944)Google Scholar, calling for a rejection of positivism and the making of ethical judgments; and evaluations of this view by G. A. Almond, L. A. Dexter, and W. F. Whyte, Vol. 40, pp. 283–312 (1946). Considerable recent literature relating to “power” is cited by these writers. Needless to say, the subject of “power” had received attention long before its reexamination was compelled by the appearance of Hobbes's Leviathan. The nature of “power” has commanded the interest of writers on politics from the day of Locke to that of Mosca and Pareto and their successors. Illustrative of the diverse approach made to the subject of power in recent years are the following works: Parsons, Structure of Social Action, op. cit., Ch. 19; Merriam, C. E., Political Power, Its Composition and Incidence (New York, 1934)Google Scholar and Systematic Politics (Chicago, 1945)Google ScholarPubMed; Russell, B. R., Power, A New Social Analysis (New York, 1938)Google Scholar; and Friedrich, C. J., Constitutional Government and Democracy (New York, 1946)Google Scholar. On the scope and method of political science, see ibid., Ch. 25.

³¹ See von Neumann, J. and Morgenstern, O., The Theory of Games and Economic Behavior (1st ed., Princeton, 1944)Google Scholar. Cp. Richardson, L. F., “Generalized Foreign Politics,” British Journal of Psychology, Monograph Supplements, Vol. 7, Suppl. 23, 1939 Google Scholar.

³¹ On arbitrary elements, see Arrow, op. cit. That civilization presupposes a communal unity issuing out of emotionalized ideas, and that ethical ideals and aspirations constitute a primary source of social change, has been well stated by A. N. Whitehead, Adventures, op. cit., pp. 7, 21, 299. Fellner's, W. analysis (Competition Among the Few, [New York, 1949] pp. 24 ff.)Google Scholar of the manner in which ethical beliefs restrict exploitative tendencies is easily extended to the field of political behavior. Some of the earlier literature is touched upon in my “Have Values a Place in Economics?” International Journal of Ethics, Vol. 44, pp. 313–331 (1934)CrossRefGoogle Scholar. See also the works cited in note 30 and Northrop, op. cit., esp. Chs. 17, 21, 23.

³³ In this country and elsewhere, for example, many actions of the state appear calculated to undermine the role and the power of the entrepreneur, the focus of dynamic economic force in western society. At the same time, the state refuses to take over the necessary role of the entrepreneur. It can only be inferred either (a) that the role of the entrepreneur is not understood, or (b) that practical theory regarding the economic role of the state excludes its performing the entrepreneurial function.

³⁴ See Timasheff, N. S., An Introduction to the Sociology of Law (Cambridge, 1939), pp. 184–187 Google Scholar.

³⁵ The Grammar of Science (Everyman, ed.), p. 17 Google Scholar.