Epistemic Scarcity: The Economics of Unresolvable Unknowns

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2507.01483v1
• Date: Wed, 02 Jul 2025 08:46:24 GMT
• Title: Epistemic Scarcity: The Economics of Unresolvable Unknowns
• Authors: Craig S Wright,
• Abstract summary: We argue that AI systems are incapable of performing the core functions of economic coordination.<n>We critique dominant ethical AI frameworks as extensions of constructivist rationalism.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
• Abstract: This paper presents a praxeological analysis of artificial intelligence and algorithmic governance, challenging assumptions about the capacity of machine systems to sustain economic and epistemic order. Drawing on Misesian a priori reasoning and Austrian theories of entrepreneurship, we argue that AI systems are incapable of performing the core functions of economic coordination: interpreting ends, discovering means, and communicating subjective value through prices. Where neoclassical and behavioural models treat decisions as optimisation under constraint, we frame them as purposive actions under uncertainty. We critique dominant ethical AI frameworks such as Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (FAT) as extensions of constructivist rationalism, which conflict with a liberal order grounded in voluntary action and property rights. Attempts to encode moral reasoning in algorithms reflect a misunderstanding of ethics and economics. However complex, AI systems cannot originate norms, interpret institutions, or bear responsibility. They remain opaque, misaligned, and inert. Using the concept of epistemic scarcity, we explore how information abundance degrades truth discernment, enabling both entrepreneurial insight and soft totalitarianism. Our analysis ends with a civilisational claim: the debate over AI concerns the future of human autonomy, institutional evolution, and reasoned choice. The Austrian tradition, focused on action, subjectivity, and spontaneous order, offers the only coherent alternative to rising computational social control.

Related papers

• Ethical AI: Towards Defining a Collective Evaluation Framework [0.3413711585591077]
  Artificial Intelligence (AI) is transforming sectors such as healthcare, finance, and autonomous systems.<n>Yet its rapid integration raises urgent ethical concerns related to data ownership, privacy, and systemic bias.<n>This article proposes a modular ethical assessment framework built on ontological blocks of meaning-discrete, interpretable units.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-30T21:10:47Z)
• Authoritarian Recursions: How Fiction, History, and AI Reinforce Control in Education, Warfare, and Discourse [0.0]
  Article theorizes how artificial intelligence systems consolidate institutional control across education, military operations, and digital discourse.<n>Analyses how intelligent systems normalize hierarchy under the guise of efficiency and neutrality.<n>Case studies include automated proctoring in education, autonomous targeting in warfare, and algorithmic curation on social platforms.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-12T01:01:26Z)
• Artificial Intelligence (AI) and the Relationship between Agency, Autonomy, and Moral Patiency [0.0]
  We argue that while current AI systems are highly sophisticated, they lack genuine agency and autonomy.<n>We do not rule out the possibility of future systems that could achieve a limited form of artificial moral agency without consciousness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-11T03:48:40Z)
• Technology as uncharted territory: Contextual integrity and the notion of AI as new ethical ground [55.2480439325792]
  I argue that efforts to promote responsible and ethical AI can inadvertently contribute to and seemingly legitimize this disregard for established contextual norms.<n>I question the current narrow prioritization in AI ethics of moral innovation over moral preservation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-06T15:36:13Z)
• Imagining and building wise machines: The centrality of AI metacognition [78.76893632793497]
  We examine what is known about human wisdom and sketch a vision of its AI counterpart.<n>We argue that AI systems particularly struggle with metacognition.<n>We discuss how wise AI might be benchmarked, trained, and implemented.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-04T18:10:10Z)
• Artificial intelligence, rationalization, and the limits of control in the public sector: the case of tax policy optimization [0.0]
  We show how much of the criticisms directed towards AI systems spring from well known tensions at the heart of Weberian rationalization. Our analysis shows that building a machine-like tax system that promotes social and economic equality is possible. It also highlights that AI driven policy optimization comes at the exclusion of other competing political values.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-07T11:54:14Z)
• Towards Responsible AI in Banking: Addressing Bias for Fair Decision-Making [69.44075077934914]
  "Responsible AI" emphasizes the critical nature of addressing biases within the development of a corporate culture. This thesis is structured around three fundamental pillars: understanding bias, mitigating bias, and accounting for bias. In line with open-source principles, we have released Bias On Demand and FairView as accessible Python packages.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-13T14:07:09Z)
• Does Explainable AI Have Moral Value? [0.0]
  Explainable AI (XAI) aims to bridge the gap between complex algorithmic systems and human stakeholders. Current discourse often examines XAI in isolation as either a technological tool, user interface, or policy mechanism. This paper proposes a unifying ethical framework grounded in moral duties and the concept of reciprocity.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-05T15:59:27Z)
• Fairness in Agreement With European Values: An Interdisciplinary Perspective on AI Regulation [61.77881142275982]
  This interdisciplinary position paper considers various concerns surrounding fairness and discrimination in AI, and discusses how AI regulations address them. We first look at AI and fairness through the lenses of law, (AI) industry, sociotechnology, and (moral) philosophy, and present various perspectives. We identify and propose the roles AI Regulation should take to make the endeavor of the AI Act a success in terms of AI fairness concerns.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-06-08T12:32:08Z)
• Relational Artificial Intelligence [5.5586788751870175]
  Even though AI is traditionally associated with rational decision making, understanding and shaping the societal impact of AI in all its facets requires a relational perspective. A rational approach to AI, where computational algorithms drive decision making independent of human intervention, has shown to result in bias and exclusion. A relational approach, that focus on the relational nature of things, is needed to deal with the ethical, legal, societal, cultural, and environmental implications of AI.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-02-04T15:29:57Z)
• The AI Economist: Optimal Economic Policy Design via Two-level Deep Reinforcement Learning [126.37520136341094]
  We show that machine-learning-based economic simulation is a powerful policy and mechanism design framework. The AI Economist is a two-level, deep RL framework that trains both agents and a social planner who co-adapt. In simple one-step economies, the AI Economist recovers the optimal tax policy of economic theory.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-08-05T17:42:35Z)
• On Consequentialism and Fairness [64.35872952140677]
  We provide a consequentialist critique of common definitions of fairness within machine learning. We conclude with a broader discussion of the issues of learning and randomization.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-01-02T05:39:48Z)
• Learning from Learning Machines: Optimisation, Rules, and Social Norms [91.3755431537592]
  It appears that the area of AI that is most analogous to the behaviour of economic entities is that of morally good decision-making. Recent successes of deep learning for AI suggest that more implicit specifications work better than explicit ones for solving such problems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2019-12-29T17:42:06Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.