Book Description

The twenty-one essays in this book provide an overview of the contributions of Nobel laureate and Hoover Institution honorary fellow Friedrich A. von Hayek to the fields of economics, political theory, history, and philosophy.Long known as one of the twentieth century's strongest defenders of the free market and the liberal social and economic order, Hayek, as the selections included here make apparent, bases his arguments on a rigorous philosophical analysis.A leading member of the Australian School of Economics, Hayek has written on such diverse subjects as the business cycle, monetary theory, capital, economic and social organization, law, history, epistemology, the theory of science, and government.The body of his work in these varied fields is unified by two fundamental ideas--the limitation of knowledge and the spontaneous formation of systems.From these two concepts are derived his defense of the market, his rejection of socialism and other planned systems, and his devotion to the liberal political and social order.

Customer Reviews (2)

Readable overview of a most distinguished career
This book is one in a series of compilations of publications by eminent scholars issued by the Hoover Institution (subsequent volumes in the series are of George J. Stigler, Milton Friedman, and Gary S. Becker).With an oeuvre as far-reaching and as extensive as Hayek's, it is inevitable that some works are not included.A notable omission is any excerpts from The Road to Serfdom, but chances are if you are interested in The Essence of Hayek, you may have already read that one.Another nitpick would be that two chapters, "Principles of a Liberal Social Order" (ch. 20) and "Whither Democracy?" (ch. 19), make for a comprehensive summary exposition of the ideas in all three volumes of Law, Legislation, and Liberty (vols. 1-2 and vol. 3, respectively), so Essence could have done without the three chapters from that trilogy, which would have freed up space for quite a few other papers, of which in Hayek's case there is an almost endless number from which to choose.

Having said all that, like the other volumes in the Essence series, this one provides as good a representation of Hayek's corpus as can probably be made in a single volume (it was published before the release date of The Fatal Conceit, but ch. 17 of Essence ["The Origins and Effects of our Morals: A Problem for Science"] is a 1983 lecture that summarizes the ideas in The Fatal Conceit pretty well).If you are new to Hayek and his political writings are your main interest, you may be better off first reading The Constitution of Liberty and/or The Road to Serfdom.But after those, this book makes for terrific sampling of Hayek's other writings.

All selections in Essence are eminently readable; e.g., there are no complex equations in the papers on economics.I am not sufficiently familiar with Hayek's writings to know whether this is characteristic of his works in general, or whether the editors deliberately made their selections this way, but either way the result is most enjoyable.

One of the most important thinkers of the 20th century
This collection of essays by Friedrich Hayek provides a great overview of his thought.The essays include early pieces on economic issues, essays on the history of economic thought, psychology, epistemology, political theory, and personal reflections.Hayek is best known for "The Road to Serfdom," a cold war anti-socialist tract which I consider his least interesting work.In this collection one discovers the Hayek who developed the analysis of how the diffuse nature of information in society reveals on the one hand why socialism failed, and on the other why entrepreneurship and creativity are critical to the well-being of society.His essay "Competition as a Discovery Procedure," included in this volume, should be required reading on college campuses across the nation.His essay "Why I Am Not a Conservative" provides a clear distinction between the views of a classical liberal (of which Hayek is perhaps the best 20th century examplar) vs. those of a conservative.Because "liberals" in the U.S. have been hostile to free enterprise and because "conservatives" have been relatively supportive of it in the U.S., the classical liberal position has become an esoteric oddity known only to a few.For those of us who believe that the most powerful basis for a just and flourishing society may be found in classical liberalism, its relative obscurity in popular perception is a serious tragedy in the history of thought.There is no better single author from who one can learn an intelligent statement of contemporary classical liberalism than F.A. Hayek.This volume is a comprehensive, digestible introduction to his thought. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (179)

Collectivism Leads to Tyranny
Friedrich August von Hayek was an Austrian-British economist and political philosopher known for his defense of classical liberalism and free-market capitalism against socialist and collectivist thought in the mid-20th century. Since 1920s, he worked in Austria. Unwilling to return to Austria after its annexation to Nazi Germany, Hayek became a British citizen in 1938, a status he held for the remainder of his life. It was during this time that "The Road to Serfdom" originated, originally published by Routledge Press in March 1944 in the UK and then by the University of Chicago in September 1944.

Hayek's central thesis of this book is that all forms of collectivism lead logically and inevitably to tyranny, and he used the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany as examples of countries which had gone down "the road to serfdom" and reached tyranny.

The book has many worthy observations. For example, all people are different by their mental development (which is also influenced by family environment and education, not counting the physical differences of the brain and endocrine system) and thus the classes of the society are needed at least to give more developed people to fully put into action their potential. Liquidation of social classes will also liquidate the abilities of more developed individuals. The same is on the international level. Consider international planning. Whichever honest and democratically open panning system will be adopted, it will be opposed by less developed and poorer nations, because they will see it as ignorance or oppression of their interests. This is obvious - the needs and goals of poor or underdeveloped countries cannot match the goals of rich or developed countries; as the interests of more educated people cannot match the interests of less educated ones.

Many people came to a conclusion that the wealth, in some extent, depends on a level of education. The problem is that not all the people in equal extend incline to the education, to their self-improvement. This is because of the differences of their needs, habits, abilities, capabilities, and so on. Leo Tolstoy in his novel "Resurrection" arose a question of how to improve the level of education: from inside of each individual or from outside? Which came first, the chicken or the egg? Should first the level of education in the society be risen which yields a revolution (dialectic transition of quantity into quality) or the revolution should make the environment to foster the education. Hayek doesn't explicitly raise this issue, but brings parallel between delegation of decision making in managing an enterprise and managing the state. Hayek thought that if a company boss makes all decision making solely by himself and doesn't give the work (of decision making) back to the people (see Ronald Heifetz's publications), it is similar to the states with totalitarian government. Such a dictatorship, enterprise-wide or country-wide, can be used in particular circumstances, but should not be used in all cases as the absolutely correct way of management, according to Hayek.

Why freedom must be saved over and over again
Hayek gives us a step by step development from well meaning socialist ideals to the cataclysm of their results over time. Hayek, a Nobel Laureate and Medal Of Freedom winner, writes from his life experiences in Austria during Germany's completion of National Socialism with the ascension of Hitler, whereupon he moved to Britain seeing the same social principles dominate there. Italy, the USSR and China allowed additional observations from a distance. His analysis goes far in clearing the mess that is modern human social evolution, showing how humans behave under the three systems of capitalism, socialism, tyranny, and how one gets from the first to the later. One of his most enlightening morsels is that the system we create, creates us. That is, once we enact a new system of living, humans mold themselves to it. Different regimes produce different human types. (Zimbardo's "Lucifer Effect") Early on we see a redefining of old words with new meanings. Freedom had once meant freedom from coercion, from arbitrary power over others, from arbitrary restrictions on individual choice. The "new freedom" becomes freedom from necessity, from compulsion, from circumstance. Excepting immediate needs of war and natural disaster, "Individual freedom," writes Hayek, "cannot be reconciled with the supremacy of one single purpose to which the whole society must be entirely and permanently subordinated." Like radical equality (complete in every way), "economic freedom" is represented as an indispensable condition of "real liberty" as liberty is dispensed of. Morals are of necessity a phenomena of individual conduct, notes Hayek, existing only in a sphere of individual freedom where one decides for themselves. Let the State dictate morality, as it eventually must under socialism, and morality disappears from individuals. People come to see themselves as more ethical because they have delegated their vices to larger and larger groups. Progression hastens another socialist teaching - the deliberate disparagement of all activities involving economic risk, and a moral opprobrium cast on gains which makes risks worth taking. Schools and press present the spirit of commercial enterprise as disreputable and making profit as immoral. "Where to employ a hundred people is represented as exploitation, but to command the same number is honorable." No longer is independence but State-sponsored security what provides rank and status.

Though socialists promise themselves a more abundant life, free of economic tethers, they must come to renounce it. As organized direction increases, the variety of ends must give way to uniformity, as no government can address the millions of products and services a blind price system manages without "managers". Recalling Hoffer's "True Believer" and the control required for any dogma to protect itself from challenge, the evolving socialist society must create glorious goals "for the people", close itself off from external influence, and lose a sense of and respect for truth as the world shrinks around them to support the social ambition. Successful socialism requires creation of a common view on essential values. It is not a rational conviction, but the acceptance of a creed that is required to justify the national plan. As the rule of law is blind, it is also incompatible with a government deliberately aiming at material equality for certain groups as "distributive justice" attempting to produce the same results for different people all under the guise of "social justice" or "greater equality" ["diversity", "inclusivity", "sensitivity"]. "I have never accused the socialists of deliberately aiming at a totalitarian regime, or even suspected they had such inclinations," writes Hayek. However, what are unforeseen yet inevitable consequences of social planning create conditions eventually requiring totalitarianism in order to succeed. Notice, economic control leads to control of all kinds. Once government is enlisted to service these higher virtues of economic equality through planned, collectivist, distributions, then someone, sometime has to start making arbitrary choices about who to benefit and who to penalize. High morals born from capitalistic democracies are the same morals demanding socio-economic equality for all, tired of waiting for results, weary of abuses and corruptions. (Sounding a great deal like America's move to Supreme Court test cases in the 1960s when Congressional legislation seemed time consuming and uncertain, as laws could be made from the bench instead.) The very opposite of intensions are created, sinking not only capitalism and democracy but morality as well, as tyranny rises to do the hard job of social control required to service the new dogma. At this point the ground is set for the National Socialist's elevation of Hitler, socialist Fascist's ascension of Mussolini and the United Soviet Socialist Republic's embrace of Stalin. Moral values socialists pride themselves in are the product of institutions they end up destroying, and the poor remain poor, or worse under tyranny, unless they are lucky enough to become one of the tyrants. It's no wonder Hayek is seen still at the political science and policy journal shelf in bookstores. He serves as a permanent reminder that, as he writes, freedom must be won over and over again in order to be maintained.

A splendid defense of free markets and individual freedom
I found this book in Amazon, read the reviews and bought it. At the end, I was embarrassed by the fact that I had a Master degree and yet lacked the knowledge that this work existed. That is the sad nature of college education these days... but I digress. I had heard of Hayek, but this book alone, with the most wonderful words on freedom and common sense, turned me into a very big fan of his work. He was truly an outstanding defender of free markets and individual freedoms, perhaps second only to Milton Friedman (if second to anyone). Read this book and you will understand why it was so popular in the U.S. when it was published... why it marked the beginning of a movement that reversed the spread of dirigism and socialism around the globe... why it is no surprise that Hayek was a heavy influence on Thatcher's economic policies... and why Hayek is considered one of the most important political philosophers of the twentieth century. This is one of the most important reads for anyone interested in free markets and individual freedom. (This is a re-post of my 1998 review, with additions)

A great examination of classical liberal principles
In the 'Road to Serfdom' Hayek has provided a lucid, thoughtful examination of the virtues of classical liberalism and the vices of socialism. His first-hand experience and historical understanding of the development of socialism and its common end in totalitarianism is a timeless lesson for any student of politics.

Greatest Book ever
This is by far the greatest book of political philosophy I have ever read.A must read, more so know than when it was written. ... Read more

Book Description

Customer Reviews (30)

Politicians should read this book
I first read The Fatal Conceit back in 1991, after reading Hayek's The Road to Serfdom.I reread the book in 2007 while commuting back and forth to California's state capital in my capacity as a state assemblyman.Needless to say, the book's profound critique of socialism means much more to me now as a 45-year-old lawmaker and front row eyewitness to daily attempts to incrementally enact socialism in the Golden State.

The Fatal Conceit's title captures the essence of the socialist/progressive/liberal impulse, born of a feeling of moral and intellectual superiority, to bring order to the free market, and in so ordering, destroy the very thing (capitalism), that allows modern civilization.Hayek writes of socialism in the introduction entitled "Was Socialism a Mistake?":

"...The dispute between the market order and socialism is no less than a matter of survival.To follow socialist morality would destroy much of present humankind and impoverish much of the rest.

"All of this raises an important point about which I wish to be explicit from the outset.Although I attack the presumption of reason on the part of socialists, my argument is in no way directed against reason properly used.By `reason properly used' I mean reason that recognizes its own limitations and, itself taught by reason, faces the implications of the astonishing fact, revealed by economics and biology, that order generated without design can far outstrip plans men consciously contrive..."

What a simple observation of the truth, "...order generated without design can far outstrip plans men consciously contrive..."Capitalism, spontaneously generated through centuries of human interaction, has proven the best way to conduct the economics of mankind.But socialists to try to "improve" upon something that no person invented, and, in so doing, ruin a healthy economy.Hayek admits that capitalism can look bleak to individuals who, through hard luck or laziness, can't make it - but he convincingly argues that helping the poor by enacting socialism out of a moral impulse "...would destroy much of present humankind and impoverish much of the rest."

This brings me to present day California with its burgeoning budget deficit brought on by chronic overspending on social programs twined with a tax regime regarded by The Tax Foundation as the 47th worst business tax climate in America.Very soon this system will collapse.The socialists/progressives/liberals who run the legislature are already proposing more taxes and more social welfare spending.Should California become America's tax dungeon by edging out Rhode Island to claim the worst business climate in the nation, the negative impact on the working class will dwarf all the combined intended good of every social welfare program enacted and yet conceived by the left as the paying jobs of the capitalists flee the state.Gazing at California, Hayek would surely shake his head sadly.

The Fatal Conceit should be required reading for every elected official in America, beginning with California.

Reviewer: Chuck DeVore is a California State Assemblyman, a retired lieutenant colonel in the Army National Guard and the author of "China Attacks."

A Timeless Classic
Frederich August Hayek

"If we wish to preserve a free society, it is essential that we recognize that the desirability of a particular object is not sufficient justification for the use of coercion."

The Fatal Conceit: The Errors of Socialism
To those who have some basic understanding of economics and history Hayek provides one of the greatest apologetic summaries of why market economics work and why socialism does not.To those who profess to love the common man and who suffer with the plight of Africa and other parts of the underdeveloped world there is a lesson to those who will hear it.Proceed with socialism and waste time, money, and lives.Proceed with market economics and with all its cruelties it is kinder by far than socialism. Just look at China, and India verses Russia and Africa.

excellent service
The book came very quickly and was packaged well. Service excellent. Book was in excellent condition, even better than advertised. I appreciate the professional service.

Insightful but Imperfect
A good book by a very intelligent author.Hayek states the "fatal conceipt" is an overestimation of the mind's power.Socialism holds that a central planning authority can create an economy that is more just and distributes resources to their most productive uses better than the free market.This is "conceipt" because in reality no mind or group of minds is powerful enough to accomplish such a task.Hayek states that markets arise from "spontaneous order" and this is the most efficient mechanism for allocating resources.This rejection of socialism is similar to von Mises' rejection based on the lack of a price structure.

Hayek also puts forth the idea of evolutionary ethics, which is somewhat more troubling.The argument is that moral conventions such as private property, rights, etc, are the result of an evolutionary process with only subtle differences from darwinism.The moral practices that will survive in the long-term are those which allow for the greatest productivity, hence private property.Any rational constructivist attempt to establish an ethical code a priori is arrogance, as Hayek just does not believe this is the way morals arise.While this thankfully eliminates socialism, it also rules out John Locke's natural rights theory, which is one cornerstone of Libertarianism.

Because evolution requires a trial of various alternatives in order to be effective, Hayek also approves of social experimentation, such as trying new governments, social systems, etc.He states that "socialism has failed so many times that it can hardly be considered experimentation," thereby implying that socialism could have been tried when it was an original idea.Hayek never clearly defines or gives guidelines for what is an acceptable social experiment and what is not.While I doubt he would have approved of something like the Bolshevik revolution as a legitimate experiment, he doesn't rule it out either.The absence of guidelines for experiments is a major weakness of this book.

All in all, The Fatal Conceipt has good insights about the emergence of cultural morality.However, one of the problems is Hayek's failure to give proper credence to a priori arguments.I'd recommend reading it, but very carefully. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (23)

Utilitarian Constitution
Hayek undertook a monumental task when he set out to write the The Constitution of Liberty. Hayek aimed at finding the proper limits between public and private life. How far should the authority of the state extend? What areas of life should be beyond the reach of the government? Hayek is stating his version of the general principles of classical liberalism, based on utilitarian ethics. Since his arguments are utilitarian, this book has economic overtones.

Hayek's purpose in restating the principles of liberal society is to defend these principles against the opposing intellectual movement of collectivism. Western Civilization succeeded largely because of its individualism. Collectivism is undermining the basis of modern civilization in the West. Individualism is important because we each lack the knowledge needed to rationally direct the affairs of others. Some people believe that they can plan out society because they are `experts' or because they are educated. Hayek saw that nobody can posses the knowledge needed to design a rational order for society. As Hayek put it, "it is largely because civilization enables us constantly to profit from knowledge which we individually do not posses that men can pursue their individual ends more successfully than they could alone".

In writing this book, Hayek shifted his attention away from full-blown socialism and towards the modern welfare state. Hayek seems to have felt that the case for socialism had been sufficiently weakened so as to allow him to critique welfare states. Hayek accepted some types of government intervention that libertarians typically oppose. Rather than opposing each program point by point, Hayek sought out some `lynchpin issues' that would limit state growth. Hayek argued strenuously against state control of the money supply, and suggested ways of limiting taxation. Hayek's libertarian critics typically cringe at some of his concessions, but we would all be in a much better position now if his constitution had been adopted.

The Constitution of Liberty is more than well reasoned, it is subtle and profound. This book reveals Hayek's deep understanding of economics, politics, and history. Reading the COL is no small undertaking, but it is a highly useful undertaking for any serious student of political economy.

Philosophy - Libertarian perspective
This review will be mostly technical in nature. Some good reviews already exist that discuss the overview of the material.

1. Part 1 The Value of Freedom, 8 chapters.
2. Part 2 Freedom and the Law, 8 chapters
3. Part 3 Freedom in the Welfare State, 8 chapters
4. Postscript: Why I am not a Conservative, 13 pages
5. End Notes = 100 pages
6. Analytical Table of Contents (valuable for reference), listing sub-topics by page number = 7 pages
7. Name Index = 10 pages
8. Subject Index = 16 pages.

My Remarks: this is philosophy of government, plus some historical development, plus economic theory-and-practice. It is a rather tough read, exact logic and completed thoughts until each point is carefully constucted and then commented on.

There are many quote-able passages, and the exhaustive referencing confirms the scholarly style.

The print is small: 42 lines per page, 17 characters per inch.

So, the 3-stars are given so as to ward-off readers that are looking for libertarian views of a popluar nature. Though the reading is somewhat hard, the individual cases discussed make this a perfect source for a dedicated libertarian to reference.

The greatest political philosophy book of the 20th century
This is the most consistent level headed book of political philosophy I have read.The first section in particular has a new fascinating idea on almost every page.Hayek was not a libertarian.His thought allowed a fair amount of elbow room for public policy as the third section will show.I also found his postscript "Why I'm not a conservative" very interesting.

Individual Freedom
Frederich August Hayek

"Perhaps the fact that we have seen millions voting themselves into complete dependence on a tyrant has made our generation understand that to choose one's government is not necessarily to secure freedom."

"Freedom granted only when it is known beforehand that its effects will be beneficial is not freedom."

"If most people are not willing to see the difficulty, this is mainly because, consciously or unconsciously, they assume that it will be they who will settle these questions for the others, and because they are convinced of their own capacity to do this justly and equitably."

Excellent book service
The book came very quickly and was packaged well. Service excellent. Book was in excellent condition, even better than advertised. I appreciate the professional service. ... Read more

Book Description

Customer Reviews (3)

Different Essays, Similar Themes
Individualism and Economic Order contains several classic essays. Chapter two (Economics and Knowledge) examines decentralized economic planning by individuals. Plan coordination among individuals requires each to form plans that contain relevant data from the plans of others. We each acquire this data through competition in markets. Every time someone adjusts their plans, others must also change their plans. So, initial plan coordination requires each to fully anticipate the actions of others. Since this is impossible, order will emerge as a result of successive trials by individuals in markets. The price system enables individuals to adjust their plans with each other through time. This is the foundation of Hayek's theories of spontaneous order and social evolution. Hayek was far ahead of his peers in examining expectations formation.

Chapter four (The Use of Knowledge in Society) is another classic. Hayek contends that the economic problem is really one how to make use of fragmented and widely dispersed data. As he indicated in chapter two, full knowledge of economic conditions reduces the economic problem to one of pure logic. Markets increase our ability to take advantage of division of labor and capital formation by extending the span of our utilization of resources beyond the span of any individual mind. The price system in markets does this by acting as a communications network. We can then each dispense with the need for conscious control over resources and rely on our own intimate knowledge of local economic conditions, and price information regarding general economic conditions. This proves that decentralized competitive systems will vastly outperform centrally planned systems.

Chapter five looks at the process of competition. Data regarding the least cost methods of satisfying consumer demand comes through the process of competition. The notion of competition as an end state, where we have attained perfect resource allocation, overlooks the importance of the actual processes by which market participants actually compete. Competition is a process of forming opinions and spreading information. It informs us regarding which alternatives are best and cheapest. Those who judge actual market outcomes with theoretical models that assume perfect information are putting the cart before the horse. Competition is the only means by which we can each acquire data on general economic conditions. Governmental bureaucrats do not simply know what the final outcomes of competition are supposed to be. This data is particular to the process of competition itself. We should therefore be wary of those who complain that markets do not deliver perfect competition based on perfect information. Markets are our best source on the data in question, albeit an imperfect one.

In chapter seven Hayek lays out the arguments that some make in favor of Socialism. Some claim that greater equality in incomes is worth the loss of efficiency that is inherent to Socialism. Others want to maintain some degree of free choice- consumer and occupational choice. Yet others want to restrict even these areas of personal choice. Socialists face a problem in trying to show how socialist planners could plan production in terms of satisfying consumer desires, without market prices. The labor theory of value did not explain actual behavior, but was instead an "a search after some illusory substance of value. Since we lack objective measures of the importance of the needs of different individuals, central planners face "a task which far exceeds the powers of individual men". In chapter eight Hayek points to specific informational problems that Socialist planners face. Of course, he deals with information in earlier chapters. But this chapter leads into the next. Chapter nine deals with proposals to simulate market competition under socialism. Hayek mentions that even if central planners have full knowledge of economic conditions, the calculations concerning the allocation of all resources is too difficult to perform. After dealing with the absurd notion of full information, Hayek turns to three issues. First, Socialists once aimed at overcoming the results of markets. Now they accept the results of market competition as a standard to aim at. Second, an omniscient and omnipresent dictator would also require omnipotence to plan an economy using their omniscience. Even if they had omniscience, the central planners would still have to work through an imperfect bureaucracy. So the notion of omnipotence is absurd. We must look at the actual bureaucratic problems that planners will face. Third, Perhaps, in a world of unchanging data Socialist planners could arrive at efficient prices for the means of production through trial and error. But, with changing data, the plans of the authority will never match the decisions of the 'man on the spot'. Hayek discusses incentive problems and knowledge problems at length, and also mentions the potential for abuse by concentrating power into the hands a few. This is the subject of his book "The Road to Serfdom".

The other chapters are not what I would call classics, but are generally of a high quality. Chapter eleven deals with an aspect of trade cycle theory. Chapter six (Free Enterprise and Competitive Order) deals with the limits of market and government and the influence of ideas. This is not Hayek's best effort in explaining these matters. Chapter one (Individualism, True and False) is much better. It discusses the drive to control individual action based on alleged notions of reason. True individualism requires humility towards the processes by which societal order emerges, not as a result of deliberate planning by any particular individual, but as an unintended consequence of self-serving individual interaction.

These are ideas that far too few appreciate. This book is key to understanding the way Hayek thought about social problems in general. The chapters might seem disjointed in the table of contents, but they have much in common. Anyone serious about understanding how society works should read this book, especially if they tend to disagree with the author's pro free market stance. Hayek is one of the worthiest opponents that Socialists face, and this book is one of his best.

One essay towers above the rest ...
own this book, please, if only for the essay "the use of knowledge in society". in a few short pages, hayek explores how to think about how people use and spread knowledge, and how that affects everyday economic behavior.

Interesting analysis of Individual behavior on the economy
F.A. Hayek, well-deserved recipient of the Nobel Prize in Economics, 1976, wrote several other deep books on political economy.This book is about how individuals are better decision-makers when it comes to their ownlives, and that a "Committee" of "Planners" cannotpossibly do a better job (How can you tell that someone else is happy? What they need?What they want?).It is no accident that countries withrelative freedom on economics are more productive and wealthier overall(US/Hong Kong) than countries with little or no economic freedom(India/sub-Sahara Africa) and lots of gov't planning. It can't be mereexploitation or culture, as India has the largest middle-class and a greatpopulation of educated people.India has more college-degree persons thanthe US, yet is significantly poorer.Hayek investigates this.A goodbook, especially for leftists and right-wing oligarchs.I used to be acommie too, but open your mind and put the rhetoric on hold, just for amoment. ... Read more

Book Description

Customer Reviews (2)

Master of free trade arguments
Concern for the self in this book zeroes in on the intellectual basis for a tremendous reputation in free world economics.It is by and about Friedrich August von Hayek, who died on March 23, 1992.Most of the 170 pages are devoted to the years leading up to THE ROAD TO SERFDOM, which Hayek wrote during World War II and published in 1944.The "autobiographical notes that Hayek wrote over a period of years beginning in 1945," (p. ix) which are used throughout the book, tend to look back into his past.Part Three, beginning on page 99, explains that the war provided a setting for thinking and writing "studies on the abuse and decline of reason to which I had devoted the first two years of the war."(p. 99).Part Three ends with a transcript (pp. 110-123) of a Radio Discussion, April 22, 1945, with University of Chicago assistant professor of economics Maynard C. Krueger, national chairman of the Socialist party, who ran as vice-presidential candidate on the national Socialist ticket in 1940, and Professor Emeritus Charles E. Merriam, who served three terms as alderman on the Chicago "City Council, and in 1911 was narrowly defeated for mayor of Chicago."(p. 109).

The discussion begins with a few pages on planning.When directly questioned about TVA, Hayek responded, "There is a great deal of the TVA to which no economist in repute, and certainly not the laissez-faire people, will object. . . . If the hydroelectric power really could not have been provided by private enterprise, I have no objection."(p. 113).If you really want economic growth, Hayek has a point, "where you can create a competitive situation, you ought to rely upon competition."(p. 113).This might be the same point:"I am a convinced free-trader, and free trade is part of the same philosophy."(p. 115).

The former alderman, Merriam, notes how the competition of ideas may result in the opposite of Hayek's ideal."It was not the fact of communism but the fear of communism that was the most powerful factor in the development of Naziism."(p. 117).The argument gets back to planning, as Hayek says, "That method of central planning which is proposed as an alternative method of organizing production to take the place of competition means that a government, or some central authority, must take complete control of the resources."(p. 119)."Most of the war controls are central planning, but it is only temporary. ... During the war, we all have to go to some extent totalitarian."(p. 119).

If people have truly lost control of the government whenever it puts itself in a war unnecessarily, the socialist Krueger might be addressing everybody when he asserts, "You seem to place no faith whatsoever in the political process as a means of keeping government responsible to the people.Is that really your position?Do you have no faith in the political process as a means of establishing responsibility?"Hayek is as contrary as possible on this point."I am quite convinced that it cannot be effectively controlled by the democratic process.It requires a degree of agreement among people which we can never expect in a free society."(p. 121).One sure quality of death, particularly during wartime, is that we will never hear a live broadcast of those three thinkers on the radio again.Since television has cut attention spans, Merriam might be truer than he knew then about Hayek's chapter of THE ROAD TO SERFDOM "on `Why the Worst Get on Top,' you seem to express grave doubts about the ability of a democratic society to accomplish much.You say, for example, that the more intelligent people are, the less likely they are to agree."(p. 122).Who would be willing to apply Hayek's concluding sentence to a current catastrophe -- lacking any economic sense, but costing billions -- American activities in Iraq?"I had realized that some kind of state action is extremely dangerous.Therefore, my whole effort was to distinguish between legitimate and illegitimate action.I have attempted to do that by saying that, so far as the government plans for competition or steps in where competition cannot possibly do the job, there is no objection; but I believe that all the other forms of government activity are highly dangerous."(p. 123).

Part Four starts out with some "wholly abstract problems."(p. 125).He spent years writing THE CONSTITUTION OF LIBERTY, "so that I was able to take the finished manuscript to my American publishers on my sixtieth birthday, May 8, 1959."(p. 130).Most of us were a lot younger back then, and to escape retirement at the age of 65, Hayek moved back to Germany.While the conversations quoted in this book are often after that date, they usually refer to what occurred in the years when he was most active in what was going on in the world.As a thinker, it is not surprising that he made more money than Karl Marx.The Index of Persons and Places on pages 161-170 is one of the best I have seen for explaining who each person mentioned in the book was, with more about Lord John Acton than about Achilles, and not much on Karl Marx (1818-1883).A question that he was asked in an interview printed in Reason magazine (July 1992), supposed that Joseph Schumpeter had been more right than Marx on how governments could be more responsible for "the collapse of capitalism due, not to its weakness (as Marx had predicted), but due to its strengths."(p. 154).Hayek could enjoy this paradox of Schumpeter, "that capitalism was certainly much better but it will not be allowed to last, while socialism is very bad but it is bound to come."(p. 154).Democracy allows the freedom for people to complain in ways that can inspire the government to make things worse, if I am catching the drift.

The Life of Hayek
This book about Hayek's life in Hayek's eye. It contains not only his academic life, but also his way in looking the world. This is a readable introduction to Hayek's philosophy, not because it has presented sometheoies, but because it has provided the necessary introduction on thisman--Hayek. ... Read more

Book Description

Book Description
While Alan Ebenstein's biography of Friedrich Hayek was the first biography of this major twentieth-century thinker, the book itself was not an exploration of his work. Hayek's Journey is the follow-up volume that gives readers an in-depth look at the evolution of Hayek's thought, the influence of the Austrian School of Economics, and the roles of Witt-gen-stein, Freud, and others in his thinking. This is a classic of Hayek scholarship written in lucid prose and a brilliant companion piece to Ebenstein's biography. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (5)

Not as good as I'd hoped
Having read this book without first reading Ebenstein's companion biography on Hayek, perhaps my criticism is not fully warranted, but this book seemed to fall a little short.Hayek is unarguably a fascinating thinker and my hope when picking this up was to learn how that thinking developed: how for example did he wrestle to change from his early socialist leanings when confronted with the problem of economic calculation.There is a lot of interesting factual information to be found in the book, but it is disjointed and ultimately a little frustrating to read.Perhaps Ebenstein's companion biography on Hayak's life reads a little smoother and expresses more of a compelling narrative, and this is just an unfortunate result of a failed biographical mind body split.

All this being said I still think many will still find the book worth a read.There is much to be gained in exploring Hayek - kind of like if I were to take a photograph of a supper model with a point and shoot camera, I'd end up with a picture worth viewing, but not because of my exemplary photographic skills.Eberstein doesn't take the greatest picture of Hayek but based on the merit of the subject I'd still recommend taking a look.

A valuable thematic supplement
In this readable volume, Ebenstein offers an overview of Hayek's thought organized thematically rather than chronologically. It is meant as a companion volume to Ebenstein's biography of Hayek, but I read it as a supplement to Caldwell's intellectual biography, Hayek's Challenge.

Being only modestly acquainted with 20th century history, and even less so on economic and political theories, I strongly endorse reading a historical account of Hayek prior to considering this thematic presentation. Hayek was a man of his time, passionately contending with political ideologies and economic centralization that he felt threatened individual liberties. In my view, a historical approach can more aptly express the interplay of social, cultural, and personal influences that shaped Hayek's life and thought.

Be that as it may, Ebenstein has done a fine job in this book. Each chapter is devoted to a specific idea of, or a major influence on, Hayek. Foundational ideas incorporated into Hayek's thought are discussed (Darwinianism, German historicism, Austrian school economics) as are significant works that denoted major changes in his thought. Individual chapters deal with Mises, Keynes, Friedman and Popper, and another contrasts Hayek's thought with Marx, Mill, and Freud. Hayek's major economic thought is address in chapters devoted to both his early years and his later work.

I recommend this book primarily as a ready and current reference for the ongoing debates and interpretations of Hayek. Ebenstein's Bibliographical Essay on the collected works of Hayek may be an essential source for those studying this man.

Another disppointing treatment of Hayek
I read Ebenstein's biography of Hayek with high expectations, only to find the work disjointed, inadequate, and incomplete, and I was left with the feeling that either the author did not understand Hayek, had problems expressing himself or did not do adequate research.

When this title hit the bookshops, I immediately purchased a copy thinking that this volume would make up for the inadequacies of the first. But again, I am left with the feeling that a better work on the life and writings of the great Von Hayek is still to be written!

Recommended.
A very good starting point for those who have heard about Hayek and his ideas, but are not ready to jump into the details of his other works. A few well known traders say that to do well in the stock market, one must have a good understanding of the thinking of the Austrian School.

This book summarizes the ideas and discusses his many books, most of which are currently in print. It is written in an easy to read style. It may help you decide which of Hayek's works to read first.

I enjoyed it.

Only goes so far in explaining the genius
Frederich Hayek was a genius who happened upon his brilliance by both nature and nurture. He lived in an era which thought it not unusual to work in both the physical and social sciences.In Hayek's case it was most important that his first love was biology since the evolutionary underpinnings of society were fundamental to his approach to the social sciences.

He is today remembered for such classics as THE FATAL CONCEIT, THE CONSTITUTION OF LIBERTY and especially THE ROAD TO SERFDOM.He excelled in many categories and it was this fusion of various fields that made his work so unique and so vital. Starting as a scientist in the tradition of Ernest Mach, he soon began studies in economics, particularly value.From semi-Socialist leanings he became convinced of the link between economic and political freedom.This was the subtext of THE ROAD TO SERFDOM.

His argument against collectivism and central-run economies are as valid today as they were in the early part of last century. Central economies fail because 1) Society has too much knowledge to be centrally commanded (2) all economic decisions become political and thus authoritarian and noncreative and (3) there is no way to set value (price) under Socialism.

THE SENSORY ORDER dealt with epistomology, then he branched out to philosophy and politics.As an example of how Socialist we have become, Hayek's views were called ""liberal" and are now called "conservative" despite the fact that they're unchanged. He wrote one piece "WHY I AM NOT A CONSERVATIVE" which is a clarion call for libertarianism and classical liberalism.

The book examines the clashes between intellectual giants - von Mises, Popper, Mach, Wittgenstein (his cousin) and others.He was a secularist, a capitalist and a political liberal in the classical sense.His work on monetary policy still affects us (adjusting interest rates to increase or decrease the money supply, "floating" currencies externally).His influence with Western politicians and intellectual leaders was and is huge. He won the Nobel Prize for Economics in appreciation for his many contributions.

Almost as an afterward Hayek issued a brilliant statement.The aim of all economists is the increase in material wealth. He wanted this accomplished through an increase in wealth (capitalism) rather than a confiscation / redistribution of wealth (socialism / central run economies). The battle between these two points of view are with us today. ... Read more

Book Description
F.A. Hayek (1899-1992) was among the most important economists and political philosophers of the twentieth century. He is widely regarded as the principal intellectual force behind the triumph of global capitalism, an 'anti-Marx' who did more than any other recent thinker to elucidate the theoretical foundations of the free market economy. His account of the role played by market prices in transmitting economic knowledge constituted a devastating critique of the socialist ideal of central economic planning, and his famous book The Road to Serfdom was a prophetic statement of the dangers which socialism posed to a free and open society. He also made significant contributions to fields as diverse as the philosophy of law, the theory of complex systems, and cognitive science. The essays in this volume, by an international team of contributors, provide a critical introduction to all aspects of Hayek's thought. ... Read more

Book Description

Customer Reviews (13)

Hayek: The Anti-Fabian
Until nearly the end of the 20th century, Friedrich Hayek seemed to be destined to be ignored and to remain in the backdrop of economic, political and philosophical history.Keynesian economics ruled, with its reliance upon state control of the levers of the economy.Hayek's vision of a renewed classical liberalism with free markets and individualism cut against the conventional intellectual wisdom of his day.Despite that, Hayek was convinced that total systems such as socialism or communism would lead to tyranny.Hayek argued that the Keynesian viewpoint, because of its reliance upon state controls, was destined to limit individual's liberty.

Hayek believed that there was an inevitable conflict between socialism and freedom.He argued passionately, and at times he was a solitary voice, for freedom and liberty.Today with the collapse of communism and the resurgence of free markets across the globe, Hayek's ideas have gained new prominence.Hayek's intellectual contributions to our world in terms of political science, philosophy, and economics can not be underestimated.

The author, Alan Ebenstein, holds a Ph.D. in economics.His account of Hayek's life is illuminating, not covering just his economic and philosophical contributions.Ebenstein covers Hayek's life from the early years and his flirtations with Fabianism (the advancement of socialist ideas through gradual means and through the insertion of its ideas into intellectual circles of influence) through to his legacy as a visionary thinker.Ebenstein's biography of Hayek's life appears to be fair and balanced on the whole.Since the author is a trained economist, you can see the benefit of his background throughout the biography without the dulling effects many associate with the dismal science.If you want to learn more about Hayek the man and his ideas, this is an ideal and recommended book.

A middle class economics hero's life.
This biography has many short chapters, and displays a considerable balance.The structure of the book reflects the nature of Hayek's thoughts."Hayek put forward the difficult idea of spontaneous order.In a spontaneous order, individuals may exchange and interact with one another as they desire.There is no central management of individual decision making."(p. 3).The fame of Friedrich Hayek is associated mainly with the political views needed to maintain a thriving economy as much as with the idea that no one person knows everything that is going on in an economy which functions as Adam Smith pictured, with each person acting in his own interest in order to produce the mix of goods and services that best provides the needs of all.Adam Smith is listed in the index, but not quite as much as Milton Friedman, who is occasionally mentioned as being more popular than Hayek, as well as more correct in the analysis of monetary policy in the United States at the start of the great depression.

Hayek finished a law degree and a second degree in political science from the University of Vienna before he lived in the United States from March 1923 to May 1924.(p. 31).One of his first economic articles in 1924 was "on American monetary policy suggesting that an expansionist credit policy leads to an overdevelopment of capital goods industries and ultimately to a crisis. . . . So I put in that article a long footnote sketching an outline of what ultimately became my explanation of industrial fluctuations. . . . A rate of interest which is inappropriately low offers to the individual sectors of the economy an advantage which is greater the more remote is their product from the consumption stage."(p. 41).The Federal Reserve Bank had been designed to keep the economy moving by offering great deals to capitalists, but when Hayek noted the tendency to produce instability, he became the head "of the evolution of Austrian business cycle theory."(p. 41).When the depression became the lowest point reached by the American economy in the 20th century, Hayek continued to think that low interest rates in the 1920s had produced the instability which produced it, while Milton Friedman produced a monetary explanation which is more widely accepted.

Public opinion is often a matter of simplifications which avoid the complexity that real problems present.Chapter 8, on Keynes, quotes Keynes attacking Marxism as if Marxism were nothing but a public opinion."How can I adopt a creed which, preferring the mud to the fish, exalts the boorish proletariat above the bourgeois and intelligentsia who, with whatever faults, are the quality of life and surely carry the seeds of all human advancement?"(p. 68).German was a problem for Keynes, who wrote "in German I can only understand what I know already!"(p. 70).Hayek tried to review Keynes' TREATISE ON MONEYfor an English journal, "Economica," when he was about to start teaching at the London School of Economics.Keynes seemed to think that his criticism could be characterized as "The wild duck has dived down to the bottom--as deep as she can get--and bitten fast hold of the weed and tangle and all the rubbish that is down there, and it would need an extraordinarily clever dog to dive after and fish her up again."(pp. 357-358).Hayek was allowed to publish a reply in the "Economic Journal" edited by Keynes "to an article by Piero Sraffa attacking him, and concluded his reply, `I venture to believe that Mr. Keynes would fully agree with me in ... that he [Sraffa] has understood Mr. Keynes' theory even less than he has my own.'Keynes then footnoted, `I should like to say that, to the best of my comprehension, Mr. Sraffa has understood my theory accurately.' "(p. 72).The finishing touches on this argument are complex.Keynes wrote that his footnote was appended to Hayek's reply "with Prof. Hayek's permission," (p. 72), a sure sign that Keynes was amused at agreeing far more with Sraffa, however Hayek might feel about it, and that he had done everything he could to force Hayek to see it his way.

Hayek was admired most for his popular book, THE ROAD TO SERFDOM, which considered central planning in control of an economy as a major step on the way to totalitarianism.He expected his book, THE CONSTITUTION OF LIBERTY, to appeal to the same readers, but when it was published on February 9, 1960, people had other concerns.In "The New York Times Book Review," Sydney Hook presented the mainstream economic opposition to Hayek's major concerns."He is an intellectual tonic.But in our present time of troubles, his economic philosophy points the road to disaster."(p. 203).

Considering disasters in the area of economics, it is difficult to counter the idea that any government program offers the kind of deviation from stability that anyone would expect from a drunken bat.One idea that was almost popular at the end of the 20th century was a lockbox, where workers' money could be kept until it was time for them to retire.Hayek followed John Locke in thinking that civil government can maintain an impartial liberty through "certain basic rules on everybody."(p. 224).LAW, LEGISLATION AND LIBERTY was supposed to provide some guidelines, but there was no lockbox in the title, or in the title of any of Hayek's books.Now tax law has changed, as a basic incentive for a rise in the price of common stock, without safeguards to see that income is taxed even once.Speculation seems to be the common assumption upon which everyone is now to be satisfied.Actually, I suppose the government might never stop flying around like a drunken bat.For all the complexity in this book, it is much less like a drunken bat than the opinions I find in any newspaper.

An Important Man, A Poor Biography -1.8 on a scale of 1 to 5
Hayek's life deserves-no demands- a biography of the highest order. I read Hayek in my studies in college and I was fascinated by his theories. He was a man who thought and wrote on profound economic issues.
This biography, while seemingly well researched, does a disservice to the man. I (and a book club for an ivy league college) found it poorly written and structured. Sentences, paragraphs and thoughts collide.
I would only recommend this book to diehard Hayek groupies (though it may cause pain). Individuals who want to learn more about him might benefit from skimming through the book. However, I would caution those individuals who seek out intelligent biographies of interesting people-that despite Hayek's very interesting life, this is not an intelligent biography worthy of him.

overrated
Ebenstein's biography of Hayek is well received, as the other reviews testify.It's informative, readable, and generally fair-minded. Nevertheless I feel that the merits of this book do not deserve such high praise as was given, even by such outstanding men as Friedman.Ebenstein's understanding of Hayek's ideas is narrow and derivative, his portrayal of the man is flat.Above all, the most fundamental aspect of Hayek's thought, namely his elucidation of a complex spontaneous order (independent of the properties of the elements), is neglected. Ebenstein also completely misunderstood Hayek's criticism of Mill, which is characterized as unfair in this book.This is no minor misunderstanding, as what's at stake is Hayek's attack on the concept of social justice, again one of the most important parts of his political philosophy.Reading this book, one gets the impression that Ebenstein is a hard-working, sincere, and intelligent fellow. But as the author of the first substantial biography of Hayek, he simply does not possess enough learning or insight to carry out this task adequately.

A readable and realistic biography
This biography is one of those that once you start reading, you can't put it down! This long-overdue biography on Hayek is more of a commentary upon his major works and thoughts, interwoven with the major movements within his life.Most personal reflections of the man himself come from people who, in most cases, only knew him briefly or in limited circumstances, which is one of the major weaknesses of the work. However, the insights into the man are, at times, critical and help to remind us that the great man was human! Yet, one is left with the feeling that there is much more to be revealed, not so much about his weaknesses, but his undoubted greatness! This book is a MUST for every lover of Hayek. But there is room, in the future, for a further biography, written in the same strain as Skidelsky's excellent work on Keynes ... Read more

Customer Reviews (8)

Understanding the Limits of Reason
The Counter Revolution of Science was one in a series of books by Hayek to explore the abuse of reason in the twentieth century.Hayek started his career writing technical economics. Books like Prices and Production and Collectivist Economic Planning were meant to settle issues among economists. Hayek's efforts were initially met with success. Hayek swayed professional opinion on business cycles. Hayek also forced socialists to revise their early proposals. Yet professional opinion turned against Hayek during the mid thirties. Why? Had they proven him wrong? Did they fail to understand why he was right?

How was it that intelligent and educated people could not see the strength of Hayek's arguments? Hayek saw that modern collectivism was working to undo the intellectual progress made during the Age of Reason and the Enlightenment. Collectivism was antithetical to reason, and would lead us to a new Dark Age if not reversed. Persons of the left with surely find this absurd, and their revulsion to Hayek's thesis is consistent with his thesis. The Left does not reject reason explicitly, it abuses reason unwittingly. People on the Left truly believe that they are progressive and scientific, but this is a false belief. Socialists and Welfare State Liberals abuse human reason by failing to see its limits.

I find the sections on Engineers particularly interesting. Hayek's views on Engineers are so diametrically opposed to Veblen's Engineers and the Price System that one must wonder why he did little more than mention Veblen in passing. The Counter Revolution of Science is one of Hayek's best books, and that is saying a lot. The Counter Revolution of Science was important in the twentieth century because it penetrated to the core of intellectual problems of that time. We live in a new century now, but the old problem of abusing reason remains. The Counter Revolution of Science should be read by the entire educated public.

To overlook the problems doesn't mean to face them!
Friedrich von Hayek has been one of the most ardent exponents of the dreamy hopes of progress and happiness that supposedly, would be brought by the Industrial Revolution.

When the triumph of the polytechnic spirit as he calls it, covers and comprises the whole of human experiences, in such extent to deny any other value it becomes a new sect and really, all of who maintain this belief become heretics due its own fanaticism. He wants to prevent us about the enormous risk of reducing the science to "scientism."

The rereading of this text is especially helpful in these times in which we are immersed in what we might call an ethical deficit of huge proportions that has underpinned the pragmatism to unexpected places. So the fact to expect the science and technologybe by themselves the universal antidote, product of a superficial diagnosis or mistaking cause and effect, sooner or later a double cutting doge weapon.

Two brief examples may witness it: the use of DDT resolved a serious problem but also generated another one. And here we have: how to deal and even conciliate a dynamical vitality in our way of life without damage of our environment; because the imminent crisis of "the greenhouse effect" simply cannot wait any longer and obviously will demand and even affect a wide spectrum of the productive forces, no matter how effective negotiator you be at the moment to conciliate both interests in conflict.

The fallacy of misplaced concreteness (A.N. Whitehead)
In this book, F.A. Hayek sets some very important nerves blank.
Social sciences study the relations between men and things and between men and men. Some philosophers thought that social sciences should be treated like natural sciences and that the latter's laws were also valid for the former ones. This `scientistic' viewpoint led to the worst absurdities and aberrations in the history of philosophy.

One of the task of science is to constitute `wholes' by constructing models which reproduce the relationship between some of many phenomena observed in real life. `Wholes' (language, market, morals, money, social processes ...) are not natural `units' like flowers, but refer only to certain structures of relationships which we select because we think that we can discern connections between them. However, for some philosophers `wholes' are more than the aggregate of all constituent parts (e.g. human history, societies, economies) and are subject to relatively simple laws. This viewpoint led to the thesis that the coherence of these large entities must be subjected to conscious control.
As F.A. Hayek remarks, phenomena like language, markets, money or morals are not real artifacts, products of deliberate creation, but the outcome of spontaneous processes. There is a crucial difference between influencing spontaneous processes and attempting to replace them by organizations fabricated by conscious control. Nevertheless, for some philosophers, processes which are consciously directed are superior to any spontaneous ones. Man must have complete power to refashion everything in any way he desires. The outcome of these policies was pure determinism, relativism, totalitarianism, collectivism, compulsive planning.

A few examples quoted in this book:
For A. Comte, `freedom equaled the rational submission to the domination of natural laws. Liberty of conscience was an antisocial dogma and a revolting monstrosity.' `There is nothing good and nothing bad; everything is relative; this is the only absolute statement.'
For F. Hegel, `man cannot change the course of history, which is directed by the laws of the development of the human mind.' `All that is real is rational and all that is rational is real.'
The influence of these philosophers (and others) cannot be overestimated until today.

In this book, F. A. Hayek shows how the 'fallacy of misplaced concreteness' generated (generates) disastrous policies for hundreds of millions of humans.
Not to be missed.

A Theoretical-HistoricalInquiry into the Constructivism of the Social Sciences
This text is yet another testament to the extraordinary erudition of Dr. Hayek, and his ability to convey that methodological subjectivism (or individualism) is the foremost analytical technique for the several social sciences.

What is discomfiting in this work is the historical support that most of our basic ideas are formed early in our academic careers, and only painfully revised in subsequent years.This is particularly troubling for many trained in the scientistic legacy of Saint-Simon, August Comte, Emile Durkheim, Karl Marx, and Hegel.Hopefully, the recrudescent interest in the "economic sociology" of Mises and Weber will free sociology from its scientistic tethers.But I am not confident about that.

Hayek's long-lived philosophical commitment to methodological subjectivism is articulate, and is unmistakably clear in this work.And the Counterrevolution only restates the postulate that social scientists ought not to imitate their more highly paid colleagues in the "hard sciences."And this seems like eminently sound advice for sociologists, and particularly now that the flagship sociology journals are cluttered with, e.g., "religiousity scales," "mentoring scales," and other synechdichocal concepts that are amenable to various measurement scales.

The price of this work is a steal.It must be known, however, that Hayek is an author who challenges readers.And this book is no different.

Central work in social and political sciences
While none of Hayek's theses were new (except to those discovering his perspectives through his writings for the first time), they have become, due to his reputation and prolific writing, central to any education in the social and political sciences.The most important insight, in my opinion, offered by this work is the collectivist mentality at the heart of modern social "sciences," which attempt to analyze human behavior and its consequences (political and otherwise) in terms of defining collectives/groups -- where it is all-too-easy to make inaccurate or false (projected) assumptions about the nature of groups and behavioral characteristics being "analyzed."That is, "scientific" approaches can be, and have been, particularly in the social and political sciences, exploited to defeat reason/common sense by structuring inquiry along projected/desired lines that may bear little substantive relationship to underlying social and political phenomena. ... Read more

Book Description
Hayek on Liberty is a concise yet exhaustive and provocative study of this classic liberal philosopher. It examines the structure and impact of Hayek's system of ideas and locates his position within Western philosophy. Not available since the 1980s, this updated 3rd edition contains a a substantial new chapter in which Gray assesses how far the historical development of the last ten years can be deployed in a critique of Hayek's thought.Gray's reassessment is not only a provoking study of a classical philosopher; it is also a timely contribution to the debate over the future of conservatism. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (2)

Definitely worth more than a single read
The shear volume of work completed by Hayek over a publishing career that marked more than fifty years makes it quite difficult to grasp the interlocking system of ideas he advocated. Gray has done an exceptional job of synthesizing this work. He presents the philosophical roots of Hayek's thought, the unique 20th century context in which Hayek's ideas competed with others, and a magnificent critique that anyone interested in Hayek should study.

Essentially, Gray reduces Hayek's contribution to that of a critic of socialism. Hayek's assertion that socialized central planning was an "epistemological impossibility," while historically evident, provides an inadequate justification for the 19th century form of capitalism Hayek advocated. The post-communist 21st century must deal with competing capitalisms, not rigid centrally planned economies, and Gray considers Hayek inadequate on this score.

Gray believes that Hayek missed an essential aspect of free market capitalism, that is, the power of progress. Free markets demand change, even change for change's sake, and the metaphor of a "spontaneous social order" arising in some sort of social evolution is not adequate to provide support for the traditional values and institutions for which Hayek had regard. Personal autonomy will always present a danger to social cohesion. In Gray's view, the free market advocated by Hayek prefers the former to the latter.

To Gray this weakness in Hayek's thought is fatal, and I tend to agree.

The best recreation of Hayek's thought available
Friedrich von Hayek has had perhaps the most profound impact of any political theorist in the last half-century.John Gray's book is a superb analysis of his ideas.Where other studies can be confusing or convoluted,Gray's always maintains its ability to lucidly recreate Hayek's argumentsfrom their intellectual roots upwards.

Understanding theintellectual foundations of Hayek's work, can be a minefield ofinaccessible terms and confusing statements.Thanks to JohnGray,however, these matters are clearly and intelligently explained.The resultis that the reader is provided with a rich insight into how Hayek'spolitical economy functions.More than just a critique of socialism,Hayek's thought is also a profound intellectual statement combining theepistemological insights of Hume with Kant's categorical imperative.Anunderstanding of its philosophical basis allows a fertile gaze into theprism that is Hayek's thought.Only Gray explains these aspects of hiswritngs clearly.

"Hayek on Liberty" is, moreover,refreshingly objective, despite the controversy which Hayek's ideasgenerate.Gray seeks to explain rather than to refute or praise.Thereader can therefore take the insights Gray offers in a number ofdirections.Although Gray clearly admires Hayek, he does not feel the needto indulge in the monotonous hero-worship to which we have becomeaccustomed.There is much to be found here for Hayek's critics too. Especially since it is doubtful that Hayek's use of Hume does not underminemany of his more positive political statements.

Gray's work is thusan invaluable guide to one of the Twentieth Century's intellectual icons.One only has to observe the saint-like worship Hayek has received in recentmonths, surrounding the centenery of his birth, to appreciate that hislegacy is an ongoing phenomenon of global proportions.Academic, student,and interested observer will find Gray's study immensely helpful as aplatform for approaching more general disussions of Hayek's ideas, of whichmany fine examples now exist.Anyone attempting a detailed appreciation ofHayek should thus keep Gray beside them at all times. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (1)

What Socialism would look like in a post-Hayekian world....
This fascinating book attempts to answer directly some of Hayek's penetrating criticisms of socialism in order to show that a socialist economic system still is viable, and perhaps even strengthened by Hayek's important insights.The author begins the book by describing Hayek as a postmodernist whose radical epistemology posits the limited and socially constituted nature of all human knowledge.This novel characterization serves two functions.On the one hand, it presents Hayek as a serious intellectual to leftist thinkers, since Hayek's work is traditionally associated with the Right (reactionary conservatism), while on the other hand, it reveals to Austrian economists how truly radical Hayek's views really were.All Austrians appreciate immensely Hayek's contributions to epistemology and economic theory, but none have gone so far as to call him a postmodernist.But Burczak's accurate and persuasive description of Hayek's thought clearly shows that his work can (and should) be identified as such.

The best part of the book are chapters 4 and 5 which attempt to criticize Hayek's views of the market and legal system expounded in chapters 2 and 3.With respect to Hayek's description the rule of the law in an economy, the author argues remarkably that Hayek was not wrong, but that he inconsistently applied his "postmodern epistemology" to this area of his work.The rule of law cannot function as a place for the discovery of universal principles which judges must articulate and apply impartially to judicial cases.Their interpretation and enforcement of laws must and always will be inescapably subjective.This criticism is fascinting because it simply extends Hayek's insights to an area in which Hayek wrote and shows that Hayek simply failed to recognize the implications of his own thinking.The legal system, the author concludes, must be "non-neutral".As the author correctly notes, "[i]t is impossible to separate market processes from the rules that shape their boundaries" (p. 45).Traditionally, Austrians have relied on Hayek's work in legal theory to argue how a just and fair legal system would give rise inexorably to an equitable economic order.Burczak's criticisms cast doubt on the tenability of Hayek's legal theory and, if taken seriously, would force Austrians to go back to the drawing board to try to improve this glaring deficiency in Austrian economics.

Again, what makes this book important as a postive critique of Hayek's work from a socialist position is that it takes Hayek's critique of central planning seriously, and recognizes the fragmented, limited, and socially constituted nature of human knowledge.However, although Burczak addresses this problem repeatedly throughout this book, he tries to directly confront it only once, and unsatisfactorily at that.Burczak sees Hayek's articulation of the knowledge problem as a "large epistemic burden" and feels compelled to try to respond to it.Again, although he repeatedly notes the seriousness of this insight for socialist economies, he tries to answer it directly only in one place.Here is his response to Hayek's very important "knowledge problem":

"one counter to Hayek's knowledge based
critique ... is intended to be 'vague'.
... As a vague guide to public policy
that admits the impossibility of human
perfectibility but nevertheless seeks
to improve welfare-promoting institutions
where feasible, it would appear possible
to encourage capability development without
necessarily destroying the market order" (p. 97).

Insisting that