I think Ransom's point about the silliness of worrying where Hayek
got those two words, and how (spontaneously?) he got them in that
particular order is quite right. The discussion and his comment have
inspired me, only a historian, to ask now (1) if Hayek really was a
textual doctrinalist, and (2) if he could read and write only
English? Actually, I know he was neither. But why do so many treat
him as if he were a doctrinalist who knew only English? For
historical (not doctrinal) antecedents of the idea you could just as
well look into Fichte or Comte or Bentham or Spencer or Roscher or
Menger or Schmoller (even if he totally misunderstood Menger's
admiration of his school's work) or Wundt or Adolph Wagner, as Mill
or von Mises.
Besides, as usual in these discussions, the student's question is now
forgotten, or ignored.
John Womack