Revolução científica e destruição criadora : relação entre a filosofia da ciência de Thomas Kuhn e o pensamento da economia por Joseph Schumpeter

Abstract

The present study aims to establish a relationship between the thinking of Thomas Kuhn in Philosophy of Science and the thinking of Joseph Schumpeter for Economy, establishing a parallel between the concepts of "Scientific Revolution" proposed by Kuhn and "Creative Destruction" proposed by Schumpeter. Despite their interest in different areas, both Thomas Kuhn and Joseph Schumpeter considered that their fields have subjectivities related to human, social, and historical issues, and that organization and progress were the result of human understanding and its ensuing relations. To achieve this goal, we will discuss the central ideas of Thomas Kuhn, including the notions of “paradigm”, “normal science” and “incommensurability”, as described in The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, Kuhn’s main work. We will also emphasize the historical context of Kuhn’s work by highlighting the most prominent Philosophy of Science thinkers preceding him, as well as Kuhn’s responses to the main criticisms to his work, especially "relativism" and "irrationalism." An additional aim of the present study is to describe the evolution of Economy until its establishment as a "normal science" from a Kuhnian perspective.This will be done by illustrating the development on economic thinking until its neoclassical formulation, and by showing the significant consolidation that Economy studies have achieved since the first ideas of Adam Smith. Joseph Schumpeter’s ideas will be detailed from the perspective of the evolution of economic thinking, revealing his estrangement, as also occurs with Kuhn, from traditional ideas of equilibrium of the economic system. We will show that Schumpeter introduces elements of disequilibrium in environments that were previously considered stable, such as consumer behavior and production techniques. Thomas Kuhn and Joseph Schumpeter seem to have understood, each in their own way, that the scientific and economic processes lack a set of neutral categories that are independent of culture, because human and historical aspects are always combined to produce our choices and behaviors. Therefore, absolute rationalism is denied by both thinkers, who assume disequilibrium and disruption as part of their study areas.