Constitutional Political Economy

, Volume 13, Issue 3, pp 275–285 | Cite as

Was Hayek a Panglossian Evolutionary Theorist? A Reply to Whitman

  • Andy Denis
Article

Abstract

By means of a consideration of Whitman (1998) the present paper considers the meanings of ‘Panglossianism’ and the relation between group and individual levels in evolution. It establishes the connection between the Panglossian policy prescription of laissez-faire and the mistaken evolutionary theory of group selection. Analysis of the passages in Hayek cited by Whitman shows that, once these passages are taken in context, and once the appropriate meaning of the term ‘Panglossian’ has been clarified, they fail to defend Hayek from this charge, but, on the contrary, confirm that Hayek was, indeed, ‘a Panglossian evolutionary theorist’.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Dawkins, R. (1989a) The Selfish Gene. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Dawkins, R. (1989b) The Extended Phenotype: the Long Reach of the Gene. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Dawkins, R. (1995) River out of Eden. London: Phoenix.Google Scholar
  4. Dennett, D. C. (1995) Darwin's Dangerous Idea. Evolution and the Meanings of Life. London: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
  5. Flew, A. G. N. (1967) Evolutionary Ethics. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  6. Gould, S. J., and Lewontin, R. (1979) “The Spandrels of San Marco and the Panglossian Paradigm: A Critique of the Adaptationist Programme.” Proceedings of the Royal Society B205: 581–98.Google Scholar
  7. Hayek, F. A. (1942) Scientism and the Study of Society Economica, vol. 91. pp. 127–152.Google Scholar
  8. Hayek, F. A. (1960) The Constitution of Liberty. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  9. Hayek, F. A. (1967) Studies in Philosophy, Politics and Economics. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  10. Hayek, F. A. (1973) Law, Legislation and Liberty. A new statement of the liberal principles of justice and political economy. Rules and Order, vol. 1. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  11. Hayek, F. A. (1988) The Fatal Conceit: The errors of socialism. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  12. Hodgson, G. M. (1993) Economics and Evolution. Bringing Life Back into Economics. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  13. Ransom, G. (1996) “The Significance of Myth and Misunderstanding in Social Science Narrative: Opening Access to Hayek's Copernican Revolution in Economics.” Paper presented at the 1996 annual meetings of the History of Economics Society and the Southern Economics Association; http://www.hayekcenter.org/hayekmyth.htmGoogle Scholar
  14. Smith, J. M. (1982) Evolution and the Theory of Games. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Whitman, D. G. (1998) “Hayek contra Pangloss on Evolutionary Systems.” Constitutional Political Economy 9: 45–66.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Andy Denis
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of EconomicsCity UniversityLondonUK

Personalised recommendations