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