The paper introduces a new concept of social entropy and a new concept of social order, both based on the normative framework of society. From these two concepts, typologies (logical and historical) of societies are inferred and examined in their basic features. To these ends, some well-known concepts such as entropy, order, system, network, synergy, norm, autopoieticity, fetality, and complexity are revisited and placed into an integrated framework. The core body of this paper addresses the structure and the mechanism of social entropy, understood as an institutionally working counterpart of social order. Finally, this paper concludes that social entropy is an artefact, like society itself, and acts through people’s behavior.

The most known and used abstract model of the financial market is based on the concept of the informational efficiency (EMH) of that market. The paper proposes an alternative which could be named the behavioural efficiency of the financial market, which is based on the behavioural entropy instead of the informational entropy. More specifically, the paper supports the idea that, in the financial market, the only measure (if any) of the entropy is the available behaviours indicated by the implicit information. Therefore, the behavioural entropy is linked to the concept of behavioural efficiency. The paper argues that, in fact, in the financial markets, there is not a (real) informational efficiency, but there exists a behavioural efficiency instead. The proposal is based both on a new typology of information in the financial market (which provides the concept of implicit information—that is, that information ”translated” by the economic agents from observing the actual behaviours) and on a non-linear (more exactly, a logistic) curve linking the behavioural entropy to the behavioural efficiency of the financial markets. Finally, the paper proposes a synergic overcoming of both EMH and AMH based on the new concept of behavioural entropy in the financial market.

The paper aim is to examine the logical and epistemological bases of the institutionalism (especially of the economic institutionalism) in order to show that it is, in fact, a species of evolutionism (including of the economic evolutionism or of the Evolutionary Economics). The analysis will be driven from the perspective of axiomatic theories as Economics should, probably, be grounded. Among others, the paper tries to demonstrate that the institutionalism as a species of evolutionism is part of Political Economics (as normative theory) but not at all a part of Economics (as positivist theory). In the end of the study, the concepts of ethics and of morals, respectively (which are explained to be vastly different from each other) are introduced in discussion and shown they are important ingredients regarding the institutionalism as a species of evolutionism. It seems further considerations in the perspective of considering institutionalism as component part of evolutionism could be of scientific interest.

The paper briefly discusses some issues approached in the study ‘A comment on the law of supply and demand’ by M. Northrup Buechner, published in this issue of J Phil Econ. The way of discussing is logical-theoretical, without bringing into attention empirical data. Even less than that, only a few of the issues debated in the original study are examined, namely those issues which appeared to this author as both the most problematic and susceptible to drive the future discussion in the matter.