Hayek's Ethics

I read an essay "The Principles of a Liberal Social Order" by Hayek this week, and I have a few musings. I dare not call them thoughts, for they are not fully developed enough for that yet.
Economists try to stay away from Theology. Too bad, because Theologians tend to stay away from economics lest they appear greedy. (Not that I know any particularly wealthy economists.)
Hayek's ethics seem to root in Kant's theology. He uses this base to develop his economic arguements. My contention is that the use of Kant is unnecessary, and possibly detrimental. Modernist arguements fall deafly on postmodern ears.
Of course, the evangelicals haven't all figured this out yet either, and they are busy writing apologetics that don't recognize this or economics.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

On the Israeli - Palestinian Conflict

Okay, so the zero-state solution won't happen. Ever. But what position should Christians take? If we are dealing with two nation-states fighting over territory to the detriment of individuals on both sides, where should our allegiance lie? Dispensationalists, per the previous thread, have eschatological reasons for favoring the nation-state of Israel , and for supporting nation-states in general. This perspective is ultimately manichean, and must be rejected. While searching for historical consistency is to be highly regarded, when ethical consistency is sacrificed in order to make things work out right, we must reject these conclusions. If we give ethics a higher priority, we must place individual sovereignty first and accept a principle of non-aggression. This disallows support for a state which imposes arbitrary standards on non-aggressive innocents. Instead we are guided by Christ’s example to minister to individuals with both the physical sub...
Read more

Why Greyhound Sucks

Gareth Higgens manages to make a movie review for Once into a screed about Greyhound. He rightly identifies the problem, but fails to understand the solution. (If a government program isn't working, all we need is more government programs, right?) The problem with Greyhound is its monopoly. But how did they get a monopoly and what is holding it up? A firm can only get monopoly power if they charge a low enough price that new competitors can't make a profit by entering the market. This should be good for the consumer because they are enjoying the lowest possible prices. This situation would be called a natural monopoly, but there are few instances of these, and none of them represent an economic injustice. Greyhound is the other kind of monopoly, the kind subsidized by the state. Some portion of every greyhound ticket is already paid for before a customer walks up to the counter. These subsidies artificially create the availability of low-ish prices. Also, they provide servi...
Read more

Myth of The Rational Voter

Russ Roberts, author of The Choice, a story which helps readers to understand Comparative Advantage has an online radio show, EconTalk . Today he interviews Bryan Caplan, author of Myth of The Rational Voter, and recent speaker at an IHS conference I attended. Bryan, having a great exposure to and understanding of the Austrian School of Economics I have great sympathies towards, persuaded me to reconsider buying into the Austrian story wholesale. Here's Robert's blog plug with link to the interview due to broadcast June 25.
Read more