An Attempt to Understand the Nature and Origin of Hayek's Transformation
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
AN ATTEMPT TO UNDERSTAND THE NATURE AND ORIGIN OF HAYEK’S TRANSFORMATION by Erik Angner BA, Uppsala University, 1995 MA, Uppsala University, 1997 Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of FAS in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy University of Pittsburgh 2004 UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH FACULTY OF ARTS AND SCIENCES This dissertation was presented by Erik Angner It was defended on October 22, 2004 and approved by Steven Husted, Professor, Economics Henry Krips, Professor, Communication Nicholas Rescher, University Professor, Philosophy Mark Perlman, University Professor (Emeritus), Economics Dissertation Director ii AN ATTEMPT TO UNDERSTAND THE NATURE AND ORIGIN OF HAYEK’S TRANSFORMATION Erik Angner, PhD University of Pittsburgh, 2004 Although the work of F. A. Hayek (1899-1992) has attracted a good deal of attention in recent years, many important questions about the nature and origin of his thought remain unanswered. This is particularly true regarding his so-called “transformation,” during which he all but abandoned technical economics and instead decided to pursue broader questions in political and social philosophy. In this dissertation I examine the system of beliefs that guided his thought, and argue that a number of important questions can be usefully addressed by seeing Hayek in the light of the Natural Law tradition. I argue that there are important reasons to consider Hayek part of this tradition. Many of the central ideas of Natural Law doctrine (especially as they appear in the classical liberal philosophers of the 18th century) are clearly present in Hayek’s work, and he was, as a matter of fact, under the governing influence of the Natural Law tradition for most of his life. The Natural Law connection helps account for a number of otherwise mysterious features of Hayek’s work, for instance, why he adopted a theory of natural selection at the level of the group as the centerpiece of his mature theory. Moreover, the link with Natural Law doctrine goes a long way toward accounting for the immense rhetorical power of his theory. Meanwhile, I claim, Hayek’s reliance on central tenets of Natural Law doctrine had important unintended, unanticipated and unwelcome consequences. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS PREFACE ..........................................................................................................................................................v 1.0 INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................................................1 2.0 THE NATURAL LAW TRADITION ................................................................................................7 3.0 NATURAL LAW IN ECONOMICS.................................................................................................14 3.1 François Quesnay and the Physiocrats.......................................................................................15 3.2 Adam Smith....................................................................................................................................20 3.3 Carl Menger and the Austrian School of Economics...............................................................29 3.4 Discussion.......................................................................................................................................35 4.0 NATURAL LAW IN THE WORK OF F. A. HAYEK..................................................................41 5.0 NATURAL LAW INFLUENCES ON HAYEK.............................................................................49 5.1 Hayek’s childhood and youth ......................................................................................................49 5.2 Hayek’s legal studies in Vienna....................................................................................................52 5.3 Hayek’s economic studies in Vienna and London....................................................................54 5.4 The impact of Smith, Menger et al. on Hayek’s thought.........................................................56 5.5 Discussion.......................................................................................................................................64 6.0 OTHER FACTORS IN HAYEK’S INTELLECTUAL DEVELOPMENT..............................65 6.1 Hayek’s transformation.................................................................................................................65 6.2 Physics and Hayek’s evolving philosophy of science...............................................................69 6.3 Road to Serfdom.................................................................................................................................76 6.4 Hayek’s wartime experiences .......................................................................................................78 6.5 The London School of Economics.............................................................................................80 6.6 The University of Chicago ...........................................................................................................83 6.7 Hayek’s disappointment with previous theories of cultural evolution ..................................84 6.8 Discussion.......................................................................................................................................87 7.0 DISCUSSION.........................................................................................................................................89 7.1 A potential problem ......................................................................................................................89 7.2 Advantages of the Natural Law perspective..............................................................................91 7.3 Concluding discussion ..................................................................................................................98 BIBLIOGRAPHY........................................................................................................................................ 101 iv PREFACE Although I started thinking about the work of Friedrich A. Hayek some years ago, this dissertation is to a great extent the result of a number of long conversations with Prof. Mark Perlman of the Department of Economics at the University of Pittsburgh. As anybody familiar with his work in the history of economic thought will know, the influence is reflected at every stage of the argument. For coming out of retirement to supervise this project, and for his extraordinarily stimulating suggestions and constant support, I owe the greatest debt of gratitude. Moreover, I am deeply grateful to the other members of my dissertation committee, Prof. Steven Husted of the Department of Economics, Prof. Henry Krips of the Department of Communication, and Prof. Nicholas Rescher of the Department of Philosophy, all at the University of Pittsburgh, for their criticism and encouragement. My understanding of the institutional context and its impact on Hayek’s thought benefited enormously from an interview with Prof. Erich Streißler at the University of Vienna, at what turned out to be a critical juncture. The text – in part or whole – has benefited from the creative destruction unleashed by a number of friends and colleagues, including Zvi Biener, Dr. Elizabeth Blum, Abel Franco, Brian Hepburn, Morgan Marietta, David Miller, Dr. Gualtiero Piccinini, and Rebecca Skloot. My thanks go to the above, and to all others (too numerous to mention) who at some point or other have been willing to discuss these ideas with me. Finally, I wish to express my gratitude for the generous financial support that I have received over the course of my doctoral studies. Chief among them is Jan Wallander and Tom Hedelius’ Foundation, whose munificent Hedelius Fellowship supported what in retrospect appear as the two v most creative years of my graduate studies. I also gratefully acknowledge the support of The Sweden America Foundation, Borgrättsfonderna at the Office of the Marshal of the Realm (Sweden), Byzantinska resefonden at Uppsala University, Carl Erik Levins Stiftelse at Skandinaviska Enskilda Banken, the Institute for Humane Studies, the Fondazione Famiglia Rausing at the Swedish Institute in Rome, and the FAS–PBC Fellowship Graduate Fund at the University of Pittsburgh. The dissertation is dedicated to my father, mother, brother and sister. For all of the above, the usual caveat applies. vi 1.0 INTRODUCTION In recent years there has been a remarkable surge in interest in the work of Friedrich A. von Hayek (1899-1992). For example, until the year 2000, eight years after his death, there was not a single book-length biography. Since then no less that four such biographies have appeared in print. The first, written in German (and so far not translated into English), was Hans Jörg Hennecke’s Friedrich August Hayek: Die Tradition der Freiheit (Hennecke 2000). Subsequently, three English language biographies were published in quick succession: Alan Ebenstein’s Friedrich Hayek: A biography (2001) and Hayek’s Journey: The mind of Friedrich Hayek (2003), and Bruce J. Caldwell’s Hayek’s Challenge: An intellectual biography (2004). As of late Hayek has also attracted a good deal of attention outside of academia, in the popular press and best selling books (cf. Frank 2000; Postrel 2004; Sen 2004). In spite of all the attention, however, many important questions about Hayek’s life and work remain