F.A. Hayek, *The Market and Other Orders*

That is the new University of Chicago Press volume of Hayek’s collected works, this time volume 15.  It is the best single-volume introduction to Hayek’s thought, if you are going to buy or read only one.  It has the best of the early essays, as you might find in Individualism and Economic Order, and then the best later essays which build upon those earlier insights.

Here is Bruce Caldwell’s introduction to the volume, for e-purchase.  The book’s table of contents is here.  Here is our MRU course on Friedrich Hayek.


I just purchased the Kindle Edition, but I could really use more access to Hayek's Letters, especially the ones to Henry Simons.

any thoughts on comparison between the intro here and Sraffa's intro to Ricardo?

Economics has become a new form of scholasticism. Endless interpretations and discussions of what dead old economists like Smith, Marx, Hayek or Keynes said.

Maybe in blogs. Not true if you consider top publications and teaching -- maybe even too little history of ideas. Sociology is much worse.

That is not exclusive to Economics.

This volume is a major scientific and cultural event -- it brings into one volume the ideas which together constitute an Copernican revolution in epistemology and social science -- recasting the work of Menger, Wittgentein, Mises, Popper etc & Hayek's own original contributions into a unified account of the problems of social order, institutions and the growth of knowledge, an account which is unmatched in the scientific and philosophical literature.

A Copernican revolution that impacted science so little as compared to Copernicus, or even to the impact of Kant, who was one of the first to use this metaphor. Really, I don't think the metaphor is appropriate to describe Hayek's influence, even though he is an important thinker.

I'm describing the substance, the content of the idea, not what what other poeple failed or didn't fail to recognize in it.

Darwin's Copernican revolution was not grasped, was widely rejected and was falsely conceived by generations of biologists -- so what.

The substance of his work constituted a Copernican rvolution even if no one but Thomas Huxley ans Alfred Wallace understood what was going on.

I should say the the contributions which come closest to matching Hayek -- those of Kuhn and Edelman -- incorporate, develop and go beyond insights found in Hayek own work of the problems of mind, learning, categorization and the growth of knowledge and understanding.

Bruce Caldwell's introduction to the volume can be found here:


Comments for this post are closed