Introduction

Essay 3 presented the approximately four dozen answers, many of them given several formulations, that are found in the literature of economics (and related fields) to the question: What is the invisible hand? Also presented there are the approximately one dozen major responses that have been elicited by another question: What are the functions of the invisible hand? Here too most, if not all, of the individual answers have numerous formulations. The resulting multiplicity is a principal feature of the use of the term “invisible hand.” The important consequence of this multiplicity, in regard to at least these two of the most fundamental aspects of the meaning of the term, is that the term is essentially ambiguous. When the invisible hand is given some four dozen identities, the term is, for most, if not all, practical and theoretical purposes, empty – indeed, it should be seen as not having an invisible hand.

Terms that are given no specific definition are called “primitive” terms. Propositions that contain one or more primitive terms have little, if any, meaning. When such a term is used aurally and even if all auditors nod in agreement, more than likely they individually identify and understand the primitive term differently. The same is true of terms that are encountered in reading. Such terms are essentially assertions. Their purpose is in part to obfuscate the fact that there is now and likely never will be a meaningful answer to the question posed. But, both more broadly and in the context of this group of essays, such terms help define the world for us by serving to reinforce some larger category (such as one identity of the invisible hand also functioning to both take advantage of and promote the general category of identities of “invisible hand”).