Welcome to the Freeskier forums.

Get involved with the Freeskier community by signing in or registering below.

Login with Facebook Sign In with Google Sign In with OpenID
Forum » Everything Skiing
A third view is that innovation results from social organization for adapting what is possible to wh
  • spark2pans1
    Posts: 581Member
    A common viewpoint is that technological invention, like the Mississippi, merely goes rolling along, year in and year out, at a steady, sure pace, on an inevitable and foreseeable course.

    As the stream of customs flows on, generation after generation, it accumulates bits and pieces of wisdom and technique.

    In this inexorable process, some innovations happen long before there's any societal need for them; others fail to happen despite long and acute need, according to whether the times are right or wrong for them Gilfillan has tried his hand, with some success, at calling creations beforehand. Among his first efforts is among the very fascinating; his article entitled \The Future Home Theatre,\ The Independent, October 17, 1912. This forecast television. There's little similarity technically between modern television and his forecasts, and his time was very much early, but he made some penetrating predictions of the social effects of television together with some that are wide of the mark.

    In sharp contrast to the perspective that innovations result from the stream of culture simply rolling along will be the views which they result from transcendent revelations, outstanding amazing geniuses like lightning or that they result in the industry, perseverance, and brains of dedicated, self-reliant people. These perspectives are as scarce today as the viewpoint that people that are unsuccessful or antisocial are in charge of their particular shortcomings, not society.

    A third perspective is that innovation results from social organization for accommodating what is potential to what is desirable. The procedure was described by Richard Nelson as \the interplay of moving frontiers of knowledge and growing demand upon the direction and chance of success of individual 'actions of novelty.' \

    This third perspective of innovation is, obviously, a special instance of the economist's general viewpoint of societal economic organization. This view, in broad terms, is the efforts of men and women as consumers to get as much satisfaction as possible from their limited incomes, as well as the attempts of the exact same individuals as producers to get just as much income as you possibly can from their small resources and capabilities to work, interact to create prices of consumers' goods and of productive services in this way in which the relation between the prices of any two things measures their relative scarcity or abundance when it comes to their power to fulfill needs. The social organization brought about through these cost or market mechanics governs what shall be produced, by whom, with what resources, and by what processes; and regulates consumption similarly. It might be viewed as an elaborate mechanism for combining information on general, overall precedence, with advice on the precise conditions of time and place; and in precisely the same time as a mechanism for supplying a powerful incentive to conform to the consequences of the messages about what must be conserved and what could be used freely.

    In this viewpoint of the societal economical organization, initiation is induced by complicated relationships among prices and costs, and more specifically by opportunities to alter those relationships in this manner the change will redound to the benefit of the individual making the change. This perspective does not indicate that inventions could be purchased custom fitted and delivered on schedule, nor that inventors are moved exclusively by pecuniary gain. It does indicate that technological developments will not be autonomous, outside the influence of financial powers, but are influenced by economic powers just as they affect economic forces.

    The growth of textile machinery in the late eighteenth century can be interpreted, in this view, as the consequence of a major effort by the social organization. The sooner advancements in business and agriculture had made food and fibres more ample, and had created the possibility of transferring some individuals from agricultural production to other activities. Improved engineering technology caused it to be possible to develop machines for handling cotton and wool.

    The same interpretation might be put on the development of transfer in the first nineteenth century. Continued expansion of people and industry confronted a serious constraint if transportation remained tied to waterways. In the eve