SHOE Archives

Societies for the History of Economics

SHOE@YORKU.CA

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
[log in to unmask] (Greg Ransom)
Date:
Thu Sep 28 07:46:49 2006
In-Reply-To:
<a06200707c140661b4fcd@[143.229.43.209]>
Message-ID:
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (25 lines)
Peter Stillman writes:  
  
>>But I kind of think it would be also interesting to study the vast  
hierarchical command order embedded in the modern economy.<<  
  
The key fact from the perspective of science here is that order  
in the human domain which does not come directly from the hand of  
a single commander or designer creates a special sort of problem  
to be explained -- a problem comparable in significant ways to the  
problem of undesigned order addressed by Charles Darwin.  Both  
Darwin and Hayek present a preceived design problem with a bottom-up  
causal explanation, rather than a "top down" designer explanation.  
  
This this problem-explanation nexus is Hayek's central point, which  
he discusses in a variety of different places in a variety of different  
ways.  
  
To be clear, Hayek and "Hayekians" have no objection to to the study of  
command structures or pre-designed "intended orders". These simply presents  
a problem of a different scientific order than does the problem of the  
general order of coordinated plans perceivable in the global market economy.  
  
Greg Ransom  
  

ATOM RSS1 RSS2