Methodological individualism
Apart from concerns with coercion and arbitrariness and made orders and spontaneous orders, Hayek derived his arguments against government action from his stance on human rationality and the nature of knowledge. His position was that of anti-rationalist individualism, which formed the assumptions on which he rested his arguments. It is clear from the previous exposition that the conscious coordination of the large numbers of individual actions that make up a complex society is problematic if not impossible, and that such an attempt would be risking dangerous, unintended consequences such as that of the 2008 financial crisis – even though the prescription for avoiding such consequences is not clear. Nevertheless, …show more content…
Just as Hayek’s separation of government intervention and non-intervention into the catallaxy was problematic, so was his application of the anti-rationalist, or evolutionary stance.
Anti-rationalist individualism
Hayek was a firm believer in methodological individualism. However, he took great care to distinguish ‘true’ individualism from ‘false’ rationalistic individualism. He dedicated the entire first chapter of Individualism and Economic Order to restating the postulates of individualism of the anti-rationalist kind, as opposed to that of the Cartesian school, which he purported inevitably led to collectivist conclusions. In the most basic sense, individualism holds that social phenomena can be explained only through individual actions directed towards others and guided by their expected behaviour (Hayek, 1948: 6). However, individualism can take two tangents. The first , that man is endowed with reason, which is equally and fully available to all and that …show more content…
From this perspective, human institutions are created by human rationality, and can be conceived by a single rational mind. The consequence of this standpoint is that human societies are capable of consciously creating social processes to serve human interests under the control of individual human reason. This is exactly what Hayek argued against. In his view, individualism is that developed by John Locke, David Hume, Adam Smith, or Edmund Burke. ‘True’ individualism purports that individual reason is fallible, limited, and imperfect, and thus, man has achieved things in spite of the fact that he is only partly guided by reason (Hayek, 1948: 8). Then, man cannot consciously design a society that serves human ends, since society as we know it has arisen spontaneously, through a historical process of trial and error, or cultural selection. In the same way as natural selection, cultural selection
Apart from concerns with coercion and arbitrariness and made orders and spontaneous orders, Hayek derived his arguments against government action from his stance on human rationality and the nature of knowledge. His position was that of anti-rationalist individualism, which formed the assumptions on which he rested his arguments. It is clear from the previous exposition that the conscious coordination of the large numbers of individual actions that make up a complex society is problematic if not impossible, and that such an attempt would be risking dangerous, unintended consequences such as that of the 2008 financial crisis – even though the prescription for avoiding such consequences is not clear. Nevertheless, …show more content…
Just as Hayek’s separation of government intervention and non-intervention into the catallaxy was problematic, so was his application of the anti-rationalist, or evolutionary stance.
Anti-rationalist individualism
Hayek was a firm believer in methodological individualism. However, he took great care to distinguish ‘true’ individualism from ‘false’ rationalistic individualism. He dedicated the entire first chapter of Individualism and Economic Order to restating the postulates of individualism of the anti-rationalist kind, as opposed to that of the Cartesian school, which he purported inevitably led to collectivist conclusions. In the most basic sense, individualism holds that social phenomena can be explained only through individual actions directed towards others and guided by their expected behaviour (Hayek, 1948: 6). However, individualism can take two tangents. The first , that man is endowed with reason, which is equally and fully available to all and that …show more content…
From this perspective, human institutions are created by human rationality, and can be conceived by a single rational mind. The consequence of this standpoint is that human societies are capable of consciously creating social processes to serve human interests under the control of individual human reason. This is exactly what Hayek argued against. In his view, individualism is that developed by John Locke, David Hume, Adam Smith, or Edmund Burke. ‘True’ individualism purports that individual reason is fallible, limited, and imperfect, and thus, man has achieved things in spite of the fact that he is only partly guided by reason (Hayek, 1948: 8). Then, man cannot consciously design a society that serves human ends, since society as we know it has arisen spontaneously, through a historical process of trial and error, or cultural selection. In the same way as natural selection, cultural selection