The
recognition of randomness as epistemological can be of great
aid both to those who believe in biological evolution and to
advocates of the free market. Neither the laws of evolution,
nor the laws of economics, of course, would fit any
definition of "randomness." Rather, they are impersonal,
abstract principles that definitively describe the
general outcomes of particular highly complex sets of
interactions. They are unable to account for every fact of
those interactions, however, and they are also not always
able to predict precisely how or when the
general outcome they anticipate will ensue. For instance,
biological evolution cannot precisely predict which
complex life forms will evolve and at what times, or which
animals in a current ecosystem will ultimately proliferate,
although traits that might enhance an animal's survival and
reproduction and traits that might hinder them can be
identified. Likewise, economics―despite the protestations of
some economists to the contrary―cannot predict the movements
of stock prices or prices in general, although particular
directional effects on prices from known technological
breakthroughs or policy decisions can be anticipated.
Evolution is often
accused of being incapable of producing intelligent life and
speciation because of its "randomness." For many advocates
of "intelligent design," it does not appear feasible that
the complexity of life today could have arisen as a result
of "chance" occurrences―such as genetic mutations―that
nobody planned and for whose outcomes nobody vouched.
However, each of these mutations―and the natural selection
pressures to which they were subject―can only be described
as random to the extent that we cannot precisely describe
the circumstances under which they occurred. The more
knowledge we have of the circumstances surrounding a
particular mutation, the more it becomes perfectly
sensible to us, and explicable as a product of causal,
natural laws, not "sheer chance." Such natural laws work
both at the microscopic, molecular level where the proximate
cause of the mutation occurred, and at the macroscopic,
species-wide level, where organisms with the mutation
interact with other organisms and with the inanimate
environment to bring about a certain episode in the history
of life.
So it is with economics;
the interactions of the free market seem chaotic and
unpredictable to many―who therefore disparage them as "random"
and agitate for centralized power over all aspects of human
life. But, in fact, the free market consists of millions of
human actors in billions of situations, and each actor has
definite purposes and motivations, as well as definite
constraints against which he or she must make decisions. The
"randomness" of behaviors on the market is only perceived
because of the observer's limited knowledge of the
billions of circumstances that generate such behaviors. We
can fathom our own lives and immediate environments, and it
may become easier to understand the general principles
behind complex economies when we recognize that each
individual life has its own purposes and orders, although
they may be orders which we find mistaken or purposes of
which we disapprove. But the interaction of these
individual microcosms is the free market; the more we
understand about it, the more sensible it becomes to us, and
the more valid conclusions we can draw regarding it.
The reason why evolution
and economies cannot be predicted at a concrete level,
although they can be understood, is the sheer complexity of
the events and interactions involved―with each event or
interaction possibly being of immense significance.
Qualitative generalizations, analyses of attributes, and
probabilistic thinking can answer some questions pertaining
to these complex systems and can enable us to navigate them
with some success. But these comprise our arsenal of
tools for interpreting reality; they do not even
begin to approach being the reality itself.
When we come to see
randomness as a product of our limited knowledge, rather
than of reality per se, we can begin to appreciate
how much there is about reality that can be
understood―rather than dismissed as impossible or inherently
chaotic―and can broaden our knowledge and mastery of
phenomena we might otherwise have seen as beyond our grasp.
|