The epistemological argument against socialism: A Wittgensteinian critique of Hayek and Giddens
Inquiry 40 (1):23 – 45 (1997)
| Abstract | 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 | ||||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,705 |
| External links |
 |
| Through your library | Configure |
Similar books and articlesMark Blaug (1993). Hayek Revisited. Critical Review 7 (1):51-60.
John Meadowcroft (2003). The British National Health Service: Lessons From the "Socialist Calculation Debate". Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 28 (3):307 – 326.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2009-01-30Total downloads53 ( #19,406 of 549,198 )Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #37,418 of 549,198 )How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
