Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorHodgson, G.M.
dc.identifier.citationHodgson , G M 2004 , ' Hayekian evolution reconsidered : A response to Caldwell ' , Cambridge Journal of Economics , vol. 28 , no. 2 , pp. 291-300 .
dc.identifier.otherPURE: 561688
dc.identifier.otherPURE UUID: 4cee4931-cc56-4712-8b5a-83f39a7c00e6
dc.identifier.otherScopus: 1842428586
dc.descriptionCopyright 2004 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.
dc.description.abstractCaldwell (2001. Hodgson on Hayek: a critique, Cambridge Journal of Economics, vol. 25, 541-55) raises a number of criticisms of Hodgson's (1993. Economics and Evolution: Bringing Life Back into Economics, Cambridge, UK and Ann Arbor, MI, Polity Press and University of Michigan Press) analysis of Hayek. This reply acknowledges the passages in The Constitution of Liberty where Hayek discusses evolutionary ideas. It is also agreed that the description in the secondary literature of Hayek as a 'methodological individualist'is misleading or flawed. However, it is argued that Hayek's neglect of Malthus remains real and problematic. This neglect is connected to Hayek's under-estimation of the scale of the Darwinian intellectual revolution. It is also argued here that Caldwell's attempt to justify Hayek's analytical assumption of the given individual is unconvincing.en
dc.relation.ispartofCambridge Journal of Economics
dc.titleHayekian evolution reconsidered : A response to Caldwellen
dc.contributor.institutionHertfordshire Business School
dc.contributor.institutionSocial Sciences, Arts & Humanities Research Institute
dc.contributor.institutionCentre for Research on Management, Economy and Society
dc.contributor.institutionGroup for Research in Organisational Evolution
dc.contributor.institutionDepartment of Accounting, Finance and Economics
dc.description.statusPeer reviewed
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Review

Files in this item


There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record