Analytical evaluation of the process of converting science to commodity and Analysis of the Conventional approach of the economics of science from an Islamic perspective

Authors

1 Assistant professor, Faculty of Economics, University of Qom

2 PhD Student of Economics, University of Qom

Abstract

Commodification of affairs and concepts and justifying them to physical goods is the process that began from the formation of conventional economics. At this process gradually it has been struggled to put up all affairs and concepts below economic logic and marketized them to transactions. Knowledge is a concept that commoditized after the 1950s.
This article has been written in an analytical method on the basis of economic philosophy by a critical approach to the commodification of knowledge. Knowledge is the capital and transactive structure that has been entered into economic literature and formed economics of science. Based on economics of science, knowledge can enter the transaction as a commodity on one hand and as capital into economic growth function to improve production and wealth.
Staying knowledge as market agent defined the market as the main motivator of knowledge production and ignored other motivators like need, culture, politics, security, wish and taste. Changing of conditions from marketized knowledge to progressive and perfect knowledge needs some institutions that can satisfy scientist’s wishes and incentives into parallel priority.

Keywords

References

1. ابن‌بابویه، محمد بن على (1362ش)، الخصال، چاپ اول، 2 جلد، قم: جامعه مدرسین.
2. احمدى میانجى، على (1419ق)، مکاتیب الرسولn، چاپ اول، 3 جلد، قم: دارالحدیث.
3. طوسى، محمد بن الحسن (1390ق)، الإستبصار فیما اختلف من الأخبار، چاپ اول، 4 جلد، تهران: دارالکتب الإسلامیة.
4. کلینى، محمد بن یعقوب بن اسحاق (1407ق)، الکافی (ط−الإسلامیة)، چاپ چهارم، 8 جلد، تهران: دارالکتب الإسلامیة.
5. لطیفی، میثم؛ سیدمحمدمهدی صادقی و سیدابوالحسن حسینی (١٣٨٧)، پرتویی از سیمای وقف در ایران اسلامی، تهران: سازمان اوقاف و امور خیریه.
6. Arrow, K., (1969), “The Organization of Economic Activity: Issues Pertinent to the Choice of Market versus Nonmarket Allocation,” in The Analysis and Evaluation of Public Expenditures: The PPB System, Washington: Joint Economic Committee.
7. Ballandonne Matthieu (2015), “New economics of science, economics of scientific knowledge and sociology of science: the case of Paul David”, Journal of Economic Methodology, pp. 391-406.
8. Barber, Benjamin (2008). Consumed: How Markets Corrupt Children, Infantilize Adults, and Swallow Citizens Whole Paperback – March 17, 2008.
9. Bonilla, Jesús P. Zamora (2005). The Economics of Scientific Knowledge, Forthcoming in Handbook of the Philosophy of Science. The Philosophy of Economics. Ed. By Uskali Mäki. Elsevier.
10. Brennan Jason, Jaworski Peter (2015), “In Defense of Commodification”, Moral Philosophy and Politics, pp 357-377.
11. Diamond, Arthur M., Jr (2008), “economics of science”, The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics. Second Edition. Eds. Steven N. Durlauf and Lawrence E. Blume. Palgrave Macmillan. The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics Online.
12. Friedmann, T. (February 1992), “Ethical Duties of Scientists, their Institutions, and the Guild of Science”, Journal of NIH Research, vol. 4, pp. 19–22.
13. Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotny, H., Schwartzman, S., Scott, P. & Trow, M. (1994), The new production of knowledge: The dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies London: SAGE Publications Ltd doi: 10.4135/9781446221853.
14. Grant, R. W. “John Locke on custom's power and reason's authority.” Review of Politics 74, no. 4 (September 1, 2012): 607–29. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0034670512000770.
15. Hands, D. W., (1994a), ‘The Sociology of Scientific Knowledge and Economics: Some Thoughts on the Possibilities’, in Robert Backhouse (ed.), New Perspectives in Economic Methodology, London: Routledge, pp. 75-106.
16. Hayter Christopher S. (2015), Social responsibility and the knowledge production function of higher education A review of the literature; in Routledge Handbook of the Economics of Knowledge, Edited by Cristiano Antonelli and Albert N. Link, Routledge, pp. 135–153.
17. Hess, C., E. Ostrom (2006), Understanding Knowledge as a Commons: From Theory to Practice, The MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
18. Mirowski Philip And Esther-Mirjamsent (2001), Science Bought And Sold: Essays In The Economics Of Science, Chicago: University Of Chicago Press.
19. Radin, Margaret Jane. (1997), “Market-Inalienability”, Harvard Law Review, 100: 1849–1937.
20. Reflection without rules: economic methodology and contemporary science theory. Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press, 2001.
21. Rescher, N. (1989), Cognitive Economy: The Economic Dimension of the Theory of Knowledge, Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.
22. Rimes Heather, Welch Jennie, Bozeman Barry (2015), An alternative to the economic value of knowledge, in Routledge Handbook of the Economics of Knowledge, Edited by Cristiano Antonelli and Albert N. Link, Routledge, pp 154-164.
23. Ritzer, George. (2012), The McDonaldization of Society: 20th Anniversary Edition, Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
24. Robbins, L. (1935), An Essay on the Nature and Significance of Economic Science, London: St Martin’s Press.
25. Sandel, Michael. (2012), What Money Can’t Buy, New York: Farrar, Strauss, and Giroux.
26. Satz, Debra (2010), Why Some Things Should Not Be for Sale, New York: Oxford.
27. Satz, Debra (2011), “Econtalk interview with Russ Roberts”, accessed August 21, 2015. http://www. econtalk.org/archives/2011/08/satz_on_markets.html
28. Shepherd Robert (2002), “Commodification, culture and tourism, tourist studies”, Shepherd R. Commodification, culture and tourism. Tourist Studies. 2002;2(2): pp 183–201.
29. Skidelsky, Robert, and Skidelsky, Edward (2013), How Much Is Enough: Money and the Good Life, New York: Other Press,
30. Wible James R. (2005), The Economics Of Science; Methodology and epistemology as if economics really mattered, Routledge.
Journal of Economic Essays; an Islamic Approach
Volume 17, Issue 33 - Serial Number 33
October 2020
Pages 199-217

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics