This book argues that ideas in the social realm are the context-bound products of distinct histories and cultures and thus cannot be co-opted across place and time. When ideas are used out of context, they become mere empty words that are depicted as absolute ideals, independent of the specific historical circumstances in which they were conceived. Therefore, highly ideologically guidelines based on one-size-fits-all principles are doomed to fail. The book emphasizes that the dominant Western intellectual paradigm has not improved human society in either Western or non-Western parts of the world. Some of the book's objectives are to rethink the dominant paradigm and invent a new world. We face an existential crisis that requires a new vision of the world and its well-being: one that is more inclusive and attentive to the diversity of people, histories, and cultures. We must remember that diversity in beliefs and values is the very essence of our humanity. This seminal work is essential reading for researchers of economic growth and development, political science, and innovation.

Autorentext

Elias G. Carayannis is Full Professor of Science, Technology, Innovation and Entrepreneurship, as well as co-Founder and co-Director of the Global and Entrepreneurial Finance Research Institute (GEFRI) and Director of Research on Science, Technology, Innovation and Entrepreneurship in the European Union Research Center (EURC) at the School of Business at George Washington University, USA. Carayannis' teaching and research activities focus on the areas of strategic Government-University-Industry R&D partnerships, technology road-mapping, technology transfer and commercialization, international science and technology policy, technological entrepreneurship and regional economic development.

Ali Pirzadeh has more than 25 years' experience as an Economist in the fields of Development Economics, Institutional Economics, Macroeconomics, and Transitional Economies. He has taught, researched, and worked with universities, government institutions and international organizations in Eastern Europe, Central Asia and Middle East. Pirzadeh received his PhD in Economics and MS in Economics from University of Washington, his MA in Sociology from University of Massachusetts, and his MEd in Education from Suffolk University.

Inhalt
Introduction This chapter contains the study's main issues and arguments, prevailing counter-arguments when applicable. The main objective is to illustrate the coherent line of reasoning and would provide the ground work for a better understanding of the arguments in this study.

Chapter 1: Ideas as a medium

This chapter will begin with the proposition that an idea is derivative of its history in a sense that such history marks the boundaries of its permissible horizon (discourse) [just as a language helps mark the boundaries of its cultural reach]. In this respect, an idea is non-transferable when such history is absent. As a corollary, there is no shared pattern that allows us to use an idea in recurrent patterns to achieve its intended objective. In this context, this chapter attempts to arrive at an understanding of what an idea is in the context of language, religion, political, and economic factors. We will discuss the philosophical aspects of idea as medium infused with meaning/intent and relevant applications, such as Maiorescu's theory of 'form without content', follow by a brief reiterating of philosophical debates on 'form' and 'content', i.e. Hegel's dialectic, in which there can be no form without content and no content without form.

Chapter 2: Political Culture

In this chapter, we start with defining the construct of political culture, as it refers to the system of beliefs about patterns of political interaction and political institutions. We will mainly concentrate on the most celebrated modern ideological platforms, e.g., liberal (neo-liberalism), socialism, liberal socialism, and so forth; and the circumstances within which they rose to become the crown jewels of modern civilization.

Here, our objective is to convey that incompatible historical and social circumstances in which political culture in individual nations prevail *and finally stand these ideological platforms to the test of history and in light of what can be called remaking* (nation-state building, socialist revolutions, and regime change). In the final section, we will link the previous discussions and to make a coherent argument in support our main arguments by several case studies: e.g. Democracy building in Post-Soviet World, Nation-state building in 20th century.

Chapter 3: Revisiting Economic Growth Paradigm

The main objective of this chapter is to depict the inapplicability of one model fits all. In this context, we argue that conventional wisdom does not take into consideration historical development as well as cultural conditions, and hence failed to achieve stated objective. Conventional wisdom requires certain preconditions and institutional setting that are necessary or sufficient to achieve the proposed objective because they are either absent or incompatible. In doing so, we intend to examine well-documented 'experiments' such as market-oriented economic transition.

Chapter 4: Knowledge transference

On the context-agnostic ideas and technical know-how, we will present conceptual paths for knowledge transference and will provide examples as we argue that certain type of what is called actionable or how-to knowledge that is 'technical' in content and does not reflect values and ideology and is transferable and easily assimilated. Within this chapter there will be a number of case studies that will examine the successes and failures of technical and procedural knowledge transfers closely: e.g. international standards such as accounting standards, institutional design blueprints, technologies and engineering constructs such as Qanat type of underground irrigation canal. Another case study example includes using indigenous knowledge in environmental and agricultural steps forward to preserve the Amazon rainforest. This is a good example of reverse conformity. Modern society cannot grasp the core of this indigenous knowledge and by definition would be harder to bring it in.