Murray N. Rothbard vs. the Philosophers - Ludwig von Mises Institute
Murray N. Rothbard vs. the Philosophers - Ludwig von Mises Institute
Murray N. Rothbard vs. the Philosophers - Ludwig von Mises Institute
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
MURRAY N. ROTHBARD VS. THE PHILOSOPHERS: UNPUBLISHED WRITINGS<br />
24 ON HAYEK, MISES, STRAUSS, AND POLYANI<br />
As it happens, this subject is more complex than first<br />
appears. We have to bear in mind that Hayek uses evolutionary<br />
premises as a starting point for his thinking about <strong>the</strong> rule<br />
of law and law in general. It represents one of <strong>the</strong> greatest<br />
expressions of <strong>the</strong> tradition of spontaneous order developed<br />
by Adam Smith and Adam Ferguson in <strong>the</strong> Scottish Enlightenment<br />
and which, continued by Edmund Burke, led to<br />
Friedrich Carl <strong>von</strong> Savigny, Henry Maine, and Carl Menger<br />
and <strong>the</strong> Austrian School of economics. In Hayek’s work, <strong>the</strong><br />
fundamental concept, and one of his most original ideas, is<br />
that of cultural evolution, which has to do with <strong>the</strong> origin and<br />
development of institutions such as religion, law, <strong>the</strong> market,<br />
and, in general, self-generating and self-regulating systems<br />
that shape a complex society. In this sense, for Hayek, rights<br />
are certainly not natural; but, given that <strong>the</strong>y have evolved<br />
spontaneously, <strong>the</strong>y cannot be termed artificial ei<strong>the</strong>r.<br />
A starting point in Hayek’s thought is <strong>the</strong> false dichotomy<br />
between natural and artificial, <strong>the</strong> latter term identifying<br />
<strong>the</strong> product of an intended project. This dichotomy<br />
obstructs <strong>the</strong> correct understanding of <strong>the</strong> process of cultural<br />
evolution that produced our traditions and our civilization.<br />
There is, however, an intermediate category of phenomena<br />
resulting from human action but not from human<br />
planning. Following <strong>the</strong> reasoning of <strong>the</strong> late Scholastics,<br />
<strong>the</strong> Spanish Jesuits who used <strong>the</strong> term naturalis to indicate<br />
social phenomena that had evolved over time, 40 Hayekian<br />
teaching explains that “In this sense, our traditional, spontaneously<br />
evolved morals are perfectly natural ra<strong>the</strong>r than<br />
artificial, and it would seem fitting to call such traditional<br />
rules ‘natural laws’.” 41<br />
In o<strong>the</strong>r words, something is natural if it has evolved spontaneously<br />
over time. What is important is to go beyond <strong>the</strong><br />
40This particular reference is to Louis de Molina. See F.A. Hayek,<br />
Law, Legislation, and Liberty, 2 vols. (London: Routledge, 1982).<br />
41F.A. Hayek, The Fatal Conceit (London: Routledge, 1988), p.<br />
143.