Affiliation:
1. Jagiellonian University
Abstract
The notion of spontaneous order helps to understand how social institutions emerge. However, ambiguity of classification of orders as spontaneous or planned raises concerns of how such a dichotomy corresponds with the complex realm of social interactions. Critics state that it is impossible to distinguish between these categories, as they rest entirely on the observer’s subjective frame of reference. Similar animadversion stems from the notion of evolutionary and endless character of social planning. The article argues that this criticism is misplaced, and it contends that categorization of orders as spontaneous or planned reflects perception of the phenomenon of deliberative formation of political order and therefore perception of the limits of reason. As a result, this approach helps recognizing normative value of the spontaneous-planned dichotomy. It also leads to rejection of the criticism according to which Hayek‘s appreciation of spontaneous order is inconsistent with his advocacy for liberal reform of constitutional order.
Reference23 articles.
1. Barry, N. (1994). The Road to Freedom – Hayek’s Social and Economic Philosophy. In J. Birner & R. van Zijp (Eds.), Hayek, Co-ordination and Evolution: His Legacy in Philosophy, Politics, Economics and the History of Ideas (pp. 141–163). London, New York: Routledge.
2. Boettke, P. J. (2005). Anarchism as a Progressive Research Program in Political Economy. In E. P. Stringham (Ed.), Anarchy, State and Public Choice (pp. 206-219). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.
3. Boudreaux, D. J. (2006). Hayek’s Relevance: A Comment on Richard A. Posner’s, ‘Hayek, Law, and Cognition’. New York University Journal of Law & Liberty, 2(1), 157–165.
4. Buchanan, J. (2008). Same players, different game: How better rules make better politics. Constitutional Political Economy, 19(3), 171-179.
5. Dale, G. (2018). ‘Our world was made by nature’: constructions of spontaneous order. Globalizations, 15(7), 924-940.