David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Inquiry 40 (1):23 – 45 (1997)
Hayek's and Mises's argument for the impossibility of socialist planning is once again popular. Their case against socialism is predicated on an account of the nature of knowledge and social interaction. Hayek refined Mises's original argument by developing a philosophical anthropology which depicts individuals as tacitly knowledgeable rule-followers embedded in a 'spontaneous order' of systems of rules. Giddens, whose social theory is informed by his reading of Wittgenstein, has recently added his sociological support to Hayek's 'epistemological argument' against socialism. With the aid of an interpretation of Wittgenstein which emphasizes his philosophy of praxis , I attempt to 'deconstruct' Giddens's and Hayek's 'picture' of tacit knowledge and rule-following on which their argument against socialism is predicated.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Mark Blaug (1993). Hayek Revisited. Critical Review 7 (1):51-60.
John O'Neill, Ecological Economics and the Politics of Knowledge : The Debate Between Hayek and Neurath.
John Meadowcroft (2003). The British National Health Service: Lessons From the "Socialist Calculation Debate". Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 28 (3):307 – 326.
Added to index2009-01-30
Total downloads65 ( #23,439 of 1,102,440 )
Recent downloads (6 months)8 ( #29,857 of 1,102,440 )
How can I increase my downloads?