Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 2

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  Friedrich A. Hayek
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
1
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Prawo spontanicznego porządku – Friedricha A. Hayeka koncepcja regulacji

100%
Firlej M.
Archiwum Filozofii Prawa i Filozofii Społecznej
|
2012
|
vol. 2(5)
36-50
PL
In the article three general questions were posed as a means of presenting explorative issue: (1) Law as regulation of an order; (2) Law as regulation of a liberty; (3) Controversy of social industry in law. In order to realize the issue thus outlined in the first section it has been shown two different and opposites kinds of orders in widely understanding term ‘sociology of law’ as well as Hayekian criticism of Descartes rationality. The structure of exogenous and endogenous orders has been carefully analysed in relation to their ancient equivalents: taxis and nomos. Special attention has been given to make an explanation of Hayekian understanding of legal frameworks connected with the process of organization and division of power. It has been outlined the rule of law in political system of Austrian economist (concept of demarchy) and his principal arguments for legislature and problem of ‘good regulation’. In the second part of thesis it has been shown a widely connection between spontaneous order and both liberty and the process of progression. In this section the strive was to present mostly values and good points in Hayekian conception, but there is also a critical part concerning both unsymmetrical constraint of freedom and symmetrical. In the third part of this thesis it has been shown the historical background of Hayekian research connected with the controversy of social industry in law. Referring to the intellectual dispute between Spencer’s organicism and Durkheim’s paternalistic conception Hayek has divided between law and law-making (legislation) and he has proved that law is only a spontaneous order notwithstanding good legislation means rules of harmonization and maintenance this kind of abstract social structure. Hayek’s concept of law is in accordance with philosophical, sociological, economical and political research of the general and popular nowadays problem with the new paternalism.36-50
EN
In the article three general questions were posed as a means of presenting explorative issue: (1) Law as regulation of an order; (2) Law as regulation of a liberty; (3) Controversy of social industry in law. In order to realize the issue thus outlined in the first section it has been shown two different and opposites kinds of orders in widely understanding term ‘sociology of law’ as well as Hayekian criticism of Descartes rationality. The structure of exogenous and endogenous orders has been carefully analysed in relation to their ancient equivalents: taxis and nomos. Special attention has been given to make an explanation of Hayekian understanding of legal frameworks connected with the process of organization and division of power. It has been outlined the rule of law in political system of Austrian economist (concept of demarchy) and his principal arguments for legislature and problem of ‘good regulation’. In the second part of thesis it has been shown a widely connection between spontaneous order and both liberty and the process of progression. In this section the strive was to present mostly values and good points in Hayekian conception, but there is also a critical part concerning both unsymmetrical constraint of freedom and symmetrical. In the third part of this thesis it has been shown the historical background of Hayekian research connected with the controversy of social industry in law. Referring to the intellectual dispute between Spencer’s organicism and Durkheim’s paternalistic conception Hayek has divided between law and law-making (legislation) and he has proved that law is only a spontaneous order notwithstanding good legislation means rules of harmonization and maintenance this kind of abstract social structure. Hayek’s concept of law is in accordance with philosophical, sociological, economical and political research of the general and popular nowadays problem with the new paternalism.
2
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Strukturalistyczna teoria zatrudniania Edmunda Phelpsa

71%
Godłów-Legiędź J.
Gospodarka Narodowa. The Polish Journal of Economics
|
2008
|
vol. 226
|
issue 9
1-18
EN
The paper evaluates the contribution of Nobel Prize-winning American economist Edmund Phelps to the development of contemporary economics. The author analyzes Phelps’ structuralist theory of employment and compares his views with the ideas of other acclaimed economists such as Milton Friedman, John M. Keynes, and Friedrich A. Hayek. Godłów-Legiędź looks at Phelps’ achievements in the context of the Swedish Royal Academy of Sciences’ decision to grant him a Nobel Prize, and describes Phelps’ position on some key dilemmas of 20th century economics. According to Godłów-Legiędź, the assessment of Phelps’ achievements offered by the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences is in fact incomplete, because it overlooks his structuralist theory of employment. Phelps, who calls himself a structuralist, considers this theory of employment to be his most important contribution to macroeconomics, Godłów-Legiędź notes. Phelps’ achievements cannot be viewed exclusively in terms of the link between inflation and unemployment, she says. It is necessary to consider the economist’s focus on what he described as “endogenizing the natural rate of unemployment,” an approach that reveals the differences between Phelps’ theory and those of Keynes and his followers as well as the monetarists and neoclassicists. Defining the natural rate of unemployment as a function of real demand and supply, Phelps referred to the 1930s dispute between Keynes and Hayek that involved the classicist and Austrian interpretations of key economic relationships. Phelps’ unorthodox approach is reflected not only by his theory and attitude to neoclassical economics, Godłów-Legiędź says, but also by his assessment of European and American capitalism and his belief about the need for fundamental changes in economic and social policies.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.