 Interactions, Reactions Norms, and StabilizersEmil Dinga ()
Chapter 9 in The Economics of Social Justice and Societal Evolution, 2026, pp 571-688 from Springer Abstract: Abstract This chapter approaches a general and abstract issue in any evolutionary process, either biological, symbolical, or logical, namely the concept of the reaction norm. First, the grounding concepts of state and process are clarified, including a logical formalization, then the very concept of the reaction norm is discussed, together with a “constellation” of concepts: input, action, reaction, and norm. In this context, the concept of reaction norm is examined, including some typologies of it, and appealing also to the concepts of multiplying vs. dividing an action/reaction. A somewhat “exotic” property of a norm (so, of a reaction norm) is introduced, namely, the concept of fetality assignable to the norm and reaction norm. Next, a (stylized) evolutionary model of reaction norm is proposed and examined in its working, based on the basic concepts related to the process of evolution: genotype, phenotype, mutation, transcription, translation, fitness, and selection. In this theoretical framework, two special kinds of reaction norms are discussed, related to the societal system and to social justice, respectively, by identifying what are called arrows in the evolutionary process. Further, based on the general concept of interaction, the very mechanism of evolution at the societal level is analysed, including references to Thermodynamics (entropy), Constructal law, and Gravity law. Starting from these evaluations of the laws of interaction, the chapter proposes a new “law of interaction”, namely the law of minimal entropic gradient, together with the required formalism. In this point, a theoretical (and logical) connection of the law of interaction and the concepts of ethics, respectively (societal) æsthetics is elaborated and interpreted. The final step of the chapter addresses the relationship between the reaction norm and the stabilizer. To this end, the concepts of discretionarity vs. automaticity are clarified, and the useful typologies of the two concepts are provided. The general structure of a stabilizer is identified, and its functioning is described, based on feedback (both negative and positive), respectively, on feedforward. The last issue examined is the relationship between the reaction norm and the stabilizer. An Annex systematizes the Kaldor-Hicks test applicable to social justice. Date: 2026 There are no downloads for this item, see the EconPapers FAQ for hints about obtaining it. Related works: Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:spr:sprchp:978-3-032-24055-2_9 Ordering information: This item can be ordered from DOI: 10.1007/978-3-032-24055-2_9 Access Statistics for this chapter More chapters in Springer Books from Springer |
Is your work missing from RePEc? Here is how to contribute.
Questions or problems? Check the EconPapers FAQ or send mail to .
EconPapers is hosted by the
School of Business at Örebro University.