I've been reading John Gray's study of F. A. Hayek, Hayek on Liberty, and I'm underwhelmed by Gray's analytical skills and Hayek's deeper thoughts.
Hayek seems to embrace a sort of sociobiology in his approach to ethics and morals. According to him, the differential reproduction of groups of people with different ethical and moral systems informs us about their vailidity. On that ground, we can say that the Chinese and the Indians have the most valid moral systems.
Hayek also emphasizes our ignorance of the overall working of the Market and that's why he claims central planning is simply impossible. On the other hand, he uses a version of Kant's Categorical Imperative to evaluate systems of ethics, laws and morals and I can't see how the ignorance argument wouldn't also apply to any attempt to consider the universalizability of actions or rules.
Sunday, October 02, 2011
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment