57
architect include roughly the same as today – the profession of an economist.
Which is logical, since his arguments were made in the 15th century – long before
the first forerunners of the economy of Bethune and Vauban (who, moreover,
became one of the forerunners of urban studies), not to mention the
mercantilists, Smith, Riccardo and Malthus, who already emerged on a significant
wave of growth firms and the demand for an economic profession. At the time of
Alberti, the architect naturally appeared, and was rightly considered, the main
organizer
of the economic life, especially if it was a city-state enterprise.
In this sense, it is worth noting the professional status of those who are
experienced in this kind of science, as a profession in neokonomike is connected
with the division of labor, its deepening and the following, in connection with
them, their current issues. Negative "merit" of Max Weber, who remembers
neokonomika in the sense embodies the Protestants organized person, consists in
the fact that he identified business (business) and the profession. This becomes
especially clear when you read theorists of "correct design". The key difference
between a business and a profession – that the choice of a profession, as a flow
restriction of incoming signals of the external world, or specialization, is the
personal choice in the macro-process of deepening division of labor (RT), the limit
leading to the reorientation and biological extinction, what warning theorists of
integral design and project thinking, and what was said above. When it comes to
business, there is a similar process of limiting the
flow of incoming signals, but not
by type of activity, and on the field problems, and without reorientation: a
systematic movement to the goal, or telezis, does not exclude the designer being
an expert, but without that the profession was his vocation – they are able to
solve problems, transforming the world in an organized way, and also to collect
and analyze information for this. The case is a solution to problems, and not a
specialized kind of activity that a person is engaged in due to the natural or
artificial division of labor and integration into a more or less established division
of labor system (Systema Razdeleniya Truda – SRT), at the end of the initiation
period in the establishment of an educational institution that also has own SRT.
Meanwhile, business generally does not care about the specialty.
The relation of design and economy (taken in its non-teaching) is similar to the
relation of ancient mechanics and physics, as art to outwit nature, and what is the
study of nature itself, the world of the naturally created and the artificially
58
created world (of which P. Gaydenko's speech in the article "Christianity and the
genesis of natural science "of the collection under its editorship), the 2000-year
boundary between which became blurred after the scientific revolution of the
XVII century. But if these sciences and art are taken as such in their differences
and connections, then design is exactly the same art that should somehow
replace art already existing, complementary to economic science, consistent with
it and forming what was noted by J.M. Keynes as a phenomenon of the "two
economies": actually coming from the political economy economy, and "financial
science". The latter is, by and large, a system of applied knowledge, for which it,
in fact, is being studied; those. "Financial business" is precisely the Case; not the
economic science itself, but the art of outsmarting economic nature, consistent
with the empirical and theoretical knowledge about it (which, for their own
specificity, mostly still theoretical). And here there is one nuisance: on the one
hand, finance – economic "mechanics", allowing economic "physics"; on the other
hand, the most sober, to date, neoconomic view of the economy asserts that the
essence of economic processes is, first, the historical originality of state-
management decisions in terms of RT and money issue, and secondly, what
exactly is trade-financial communication, coupled with the deficit-free volume of
the money supply circulating in the oecumene, are the main conditions for the
growth of social welfare and scientific and technological development. That is, the
maxims of economic art are at the core of the notion of the nature of economic
science (just as in the XVII century mechanics turned out
to be the core of physics,
and the artificial with the natural began to be considered on general grounds).
How here to be with design?
The
solution, in
my opinion, is that neoconomics, after the
publication of the book
"Growth Epoch" by Grigoriev, video recordings of the 2nd cycle of general
lectures and a series of lectures on the company's economy, is quite ready to
reconsider the apparatus of applied economic instruments that accompanied the
scientific apparatus for 300 years of the development of economic science –
especially since, as the author's positions show, she came very close to this
possibility. Explaining the nature of the world from the
standpoint of acting forces
and the artificially created tool, which is used naturally in the world, it is possible
to offer the toolkit a new one, especially since neoconomics goes beyond the