The article examines logical aspects of the economic universe through the lens of its key elements – resources, institutions and interconnections between them. It is emphasized that starting from the New Times one of the main issues of economic science has been the study of logic, the historical tendency of movement of two key factors (resources): capital and labour. At this stage logical preconditions of the analysis of natural, financial, technological resources acquire considerable significance. The logic of capital and labour is investigated in the context of economic heritage of A. Smith, K. Marx, R. Luxemburg, representatives of the Cambridge school, modern authors (T. Piketty). Starting from ХІХ century, the correlation between capital value and labour value in the national income has been considered the main integral indicator reflecting the state and logic of labour. The logic of natural resources is most fully exemplified by the concept of sustainable economic development, which reflects the content and types of interrelations between the society and the natural environment both at present and in future. At the same time access, distribution and use of resources should take place on the basis of the expenditures-income principle and continue for each generation in a logical and fair way. The logic of technological resources is revealed primarily through the lens of industrial revolutions. Logical dimensions of financial resources have been represented in the works of J.S. Mill, J. Schumpeter and Ch. Kindleberger. Ch. Darwin’s theory of evolution is the basis of institutional logic. Traditions, customs, their evolution, influence on an individual’s behaviour and the philosophy of American pragmatism were the foundation of logic of Veblen’s institutionalism. The logic of relations between resources and institutions is based on the works of B. Russell, A. Whitehead and R. Carnap. Interaction of resources and institutions has been researched in the light of using resources by different generations of human communities and was called ‘the logic of the play between generations’.
Keywords:logic, resources, institutions, capital, labour, evolution, revolution, habits, traditions
1. Hrytsenko, A. A. (2015). Contemporary crisis on the context of the logic of societal-economic development. Ekonomika Ukrainy – Economy of Ukraine, 6, 18-36 [in Ukrainian].
2. Castells, M. (2000). The Information Age: Economy, Society and Culture. Moscow [in Russian].
3. Keynes, J. M. (2007). The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money. The Selected Works. Moscow: GU VShJe [in Russian].
4. Leontief, V. V. (2007). Selected Works in 3 Vol. Vol. 3. Selected Worksarticles. Moscow [in Russian].
5. Marx, K. (1982). Capital. Critique of Political Economy. Vol. 1, Vol. 2, Vol. 3. Кyiv [in Ukrainian].
6. North, D. C. (2010). Understanding the Process of Economic Change.Transl. Moscow: Izd. dom Gos. un-ta — Vysshej shkoly ekonomiki [in Russian].
7. Piketti, T. (2016). Capital in XXI century. Кyiv: Nash format [in Ukrainian].
8. Popper, K. (2010). The Logic of scientific discovery. Moscow: AST; Astrel [in Russian].
9. Samuelson, P. A. (1992). Economics. Vol 1. Moscow: Algon [in Russian].
10. Smith, A. (2001). The Wealth of Nations. An Inquiry into the nature and causes of the wealth of Nations. Кyiv: Port-Royal [in Ukrainian].
11. Filipenko, A. (2020). Digital Economy: Theorethical and Applied Aspect. Econ. teor. – Economic theory, 2, 54-66.
doi.org/10.15407/etet2020.02.054 [in Ukrainian].
12. Filipenko, A. (2014). Economic World: the Ontology. Econ. teor. – Economic theory, 3, 38-47 [in Ukrainian].
13. Filipenko, A. S. (2017). Basic methodological views on economic theory. In Society, Economics and Economic Science in the XXI Century: materials of the II International. scientific-practical conf.\ April 21-22, 2017 (p. 15-18). Kyiv: KNEU [in Ukrainian].
14. Sztompka, P. (2020). Sociology. Analysis of society. Lviv: Kolir PRO [in Ukrainian].
15. Almeida, F. (May-Aug 2016). Society and brain: A complementary approachto Thorstein Veblen’s conspicuous consumerbased on Tibor Sci-tovsky’s neuropsychology. Nova econ, 26 (2).
doi.org/10.1590/0103-6351/2994
16. Bates, R. H. (1996). Institutions as Investments. Development Discussion Paper, 527.
17. Becchio, G. (2020). The Two Blades of Occam’s Razor in Economics: Logical and Heuristic. Economic Thought, 9.1: 1-17.
18. Cairnes, J. E. (2001). The Character and Logical Method of Political Economy. Kitchener.
19. Jagodziński W. (2017). The concept of institutional logic in the research of the spatial organization of economics. World Scientific News, 72, 618-627. Retrieved from
www.worldscientificnews.com
20. Kuczynski, J. (1937). Labour Conditions in Western Europe 1820 to 1935. London.
21. Maddison A. (2003). The World Economy: Historical Statistics. Paris.
doi.org/10.1787/9789264104143-en
22. Mestrovic S. G. (2010). Vicious abstractionism and the Darwinian struggle for existence of Veblen’s and Durkheim’s ideas. Sosyoloji Dergisi, 3. Dizi, 21, 61-84.
23. Morck, R. (January 2021). Kindleberger Cycles: Method in the Madness of Crowds? Working Paper, 28411. Retrieved from
www.nber.org/papers/w28411.
doi.org/10.3386/w28411
24. Robinson, J. (1956). The Accumulation of Capital. London.
25. Robinson, J. (1971). Economic Heresies. New York.
26. Priest, G. (2017). Logic: A Very Short Introduction. Second Edition. Oxford University Press.
27. Schwab, K. (2016). The Fourth Industrial Revolution. Geneva.
28. Soskise, D., Bates, R. H., Epstein, D. (1992). Ambition and Constraint: The Stabilizing Role of Institutions. Journal of Law, Economics, and Organizations, 8.
doi.org/10.1093/actrade/9780198811701.001.0001
29. Mäki, U. (ed.) (2009). The Methodology of Positive Economics. Reflections on the Milton Friedman legacy. Cambridge University Press.
doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511581427
30. The Technology and Innovation Report 2021. Geneva, 2021.
English
Ukrainian 
