Gregor Mendel and endogenous growth theory
 

(Warning: Grapevine tone).

According classical growth theory, technological innovation is independent of economic forces. A new scientific discovery made in isolation spurs technological advancement and consequently economic growth.

But reality is different. Recently, I've been studying Gregor Mendel. Myth has it that the father of modern genetics was a monk mixing peas outside his monastery in isolation, when in fact there was burgeoning trade in the Austro-Hungarian empire that led everyone to mix better peas for sale. Technological innovation is endogenous to, not exogenous from, incentives.

What is your point? Mendel is not known for "mixing peas." He is known for his observations and inferences on the breeding of peas.

"Mixing peas" is merely crude colloquial-speak, don't take it too literally.

My point is his discoveries arose from economic incentives.

Isn't this merely a correlation? Why couldn't it be both?

So you're saying Mendel's discoveries spurred the trade that was going on in the Austro-Hungarian empire?

Yes. exactly. You sure hit that nail on the head.


If technological innovations occur without respect to ecnomic incentives then does the fact that Mendel's innovations took place amidst commerce show causation?

Mendel's findings weren't popularized until after he died.

The causal mechanism is simple: Burgeoning commerce led everyone to mix better peas for sale. Mendel got in on the bandwagon, then discovered the concept of dominant/recessive genes while mixing peas.

He wasn't mixing peas for fun.

This is my 2nd nomination for dumbest thread of the year.

Where's the proof behind his motivation? Your hunch, or is there some evidence from him or a contemporary about his motives?

Actually, he was recruited by a society dedicated to mixing better peas.

http://ocw.mit.edu/OcwWeb/Biology/7-...il/embed06.htm

When I read this I thought, "totally new growth theory."