David B. Shemano wrote:
Since people are flawed mistake makers, the question becomes what institutional
arrangements are best conducive to good decision-making by people and
minimizing mistakes by people? What institutional arrangements best allow
mistakes by people to be corrected by people? I think theory and history argue
in favor of markets as opposed to the alternatives on the table.
Neither I, nor Hayek, nor anybody I take seriously, believes markets inherently
produce a Panglossian result. All that we believe is that markets produce
better results than the alternatives.
David,
I agree that many posters in this group don't have a very good understanding of
Hayek's arguments. But Andy Denis makes a serious case that Hayek is Panglossian.
Andy's work is worth serious consideration.
Friedrich Hayek: a Panglossian evolutionary theorist
http://www.staff.city.ac.uk/andy.denis/research/thesis/05.htm
Was Hayek a Panglossian evolutionary theorist? A reply to Whitman
http://www.staff.city.ac.uk/andy.denis/research/cpe_whitman.doc
Another serious critique of Hayek from the left is Theodore Burczak's book
"Socialism after Hayek". The neo-Austrian Steve Horwitz once told me that Ted's
book is, in his view, the most serious challenge to current Austrian views.
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
