In the 20th century, two core problems faced by western thought were how to explain the disaster of Nazi Germany and the failure of the Soviet model. Hayek put forward his own explanation to these two problems based on the concept of "rational conceit".
What is the relationship between Nazi and Soviet history and "rational conceit"? What's so special about Hayek's answer? What kind of influence did it have on later generations?
Are Nazis irrational?
First of all, Hayek used "rational conceit" to explain the history of Germany and the Soviet Union, which was an alternative view different from the mainstream view at that time.
In the late World War II, the mainstream view in the West believed that Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union were two completely different social and economic models, the Soviet Union was super-rational and the Nazi was irrational, which were far from each other. However, Hayek believes that the roots of these two modes are the same, both of which come from "rational conceit". It is embodied in the implementation of planned economy in the economic field, and social planning relies on highly rational system design.
Hayek published his masterpiece "The Slave Road" in 1944, in which he criticized the Soviet planned economy model very well, but many readers often ignored it. This book also discusses the ideological origin of Nazism. Prior to this, the popular view was that Nazism was an irrational movement with no ideological depth and the behavior of a group of lunatics. Hayek said that this is not the case. Nazism has its profound ideological origin, and it is actually the highest version of a collectivist dream.
Hayek pointed out that the idea of advocating organizational planning had a great influence in Germany as early as the beginning of the 20th century. He quoted a book published in Germany1920s, which said: "Prussian concept" requires everyone to be a civil servant of the country ... The future country will be a country ruled by bureaucrats. Will business rule the country or the country rule the business in the future: Germany must solve this decisive problem for the whole world.
From 1930, Germany began to create a powerful planned economy system. Including the establishment of a series of economic control institutions, controlling enterprises through monopoly groups, and even directly setting commodity prices by the government. This practice was very successful and created a miracle of German economic revival in the context of the Great Depression. However, there are profound dangers hidden in the miracle. For example, all the subtle links in agriculture are controlled by the state and have been in a state of stagnation for a long time. After further transition to the war economy, Germany's economic system eventually went bankrupt with the failure of the war.
Hayek emphasized that this planning model showed that Nazi Germany was not a product of madness, but contained a highly rational part in its thought and practice, trying to eradicate all irrational things with rational modernization. Even when persecuting Jews, the Nazi slogan was not hatred at first, but pseudoscience proved that Jews were out of order, so they should be eradicated. The "cleanliness" of Nazi Germany in moral and social order comes from the so-called scientific rationality. They think they have mastered the ultimate knowledge of mankind and want to pursue Excellence indefinitely.
Tempting "rational conceit"
This shows Hayek's second uniqueness, which is different from the mainstream view of the West at that time. His critical diagnosis of Nazi Germany was not a moral accusation at first, but an exposure of its cognitive obstacles: the Nazi disaster was not caused by a group of lunatics or demons, and its root was a misunderstanding of "rationality" and was tempted by "rational conceit".
Under the rational conceit, the ideal people pursue may be extremely lofty, but the rational conceit will make us backfire. Popper also said that some designers of totalitarian system had good wishes and keen insight, but they fell into utopian fantasy and eventually caused disaster. Einstein also said something similar. He said: The road to hell is paved with good wishes.
Since "rational conceit" is so dangerous, we should be vigilant. This is the most direct reaction, but Hayek's warning is much deeper.
Hayek's book "Fatal Conceit" says that the conceit of reason is fatal, because it is difficult for us to escape the temptation of making overall design with reason. Because this gives us an expectation to get rid of and conquer the high uncertainty of modern society and the anxiety and uneasiness brought by overall planning. However, this is an illusory expectation.
"Inevitable ignorance of human beings" and spontaneous order
Hayek's thought warns us that we must always be aware of "the inevitable ignorance of human beings". This is not to say that human beings are ignorant, but to emphasize that human knowledge is always limited and inevitably includes ignorance.
According to Hayek, reason has two functions. The first is the pursuit of knowledge. However, reason cannot exhaust all knowledge. There is a famous saying that the more you know, the more you don't know. Trying to exhaust knowledge with reason is the conceit of reason and an illusion. Therefore, rationality has a second function, which is to recognize the limitations of rational knowledge itself and remain cautious and skeptical about it.
Therefore, the fundamental drawback of planned economy is that human beings can acquire enough knowledge and design a perfect order. In Hayek's view, this is simply not feasible.
However, if we admit the inevitable ignorance of human beings, how can social order be created?
This goes back to the core concept we talked about yesterday: spontaneous order.
Hayek pointed out that even without artificial overall design, order can be naturally generated and spontaneously evolved. The last lecture gives examples of rural roads, languages and laws. But there is also the most classic spontaneous order, which is the price mechanism in the market.
How should the goods be priced? It stands to reason that this has a lot to do with the needs of consumers. To set a reasonable price, you must understand these needs. However, the needs of consumers vary widely, and the same commodity is likely to have different functions and values for different consumers. You can't know the specific needs of every consumer. Without enough knowledge, how to make reasonable pricing?
Hayek said that the market provides a solution to this problem. The market spontaneously provides an exchange system, which brings diverse demands together to form market prices and can respond to complex demands in time. In the process of market price formation, there is an order that has not been deliberately designed. Even if no one can still get all the information and knowledge, the market itself can spontaneously form a relatively suitable price. This is a spontaneous order.
Hayek made a unique interpretation and criticism on two core issues of 20th century thought, and his thought itself experienced ups and downs in the 20th century.
Early Hayek's view is a challenge to the mainstream thought and is on the edge of the ideological circle. In the debate with Keynes, Keynes gained the upper hand at first, and his theory of state intervention was more popular, because the western society had just experienced a serious economic crisis.
It was not until1970s that Hayek's reputation was promoted. From 65438 to 0974, he won the Nobel Prize in Economics. At that time, people found that the planned economy model exposed its disadvantages more and more obviously. In the1980s, the laissez-faire economic policy became more and more popular with Reagan and Thatcher in power, and Hayek's reputation also increased. 199 1 year, the Soviet union collapsed and the cold war ended. At that time, Hayek's reputation was in full swing. He was regarded as a theoretical prophet who predicted the end of the Soviet Union decades ago. Hayek's thought, once marginalized, became the new mainstream.
However, with the widening gap between the rich and the poor in western society and the slowdown of economic growth in the past 30 years, people began to reflect and criticize the neo-liberalism represented by Hayek.
How should we treat Hayek's thought?
In my opinion, Hayek is neither a heresy nor a prophet. His ideas are insightful, but they should not be regarded as dogma. In fact, Hayek himself is not opposed to all plans. He certainly understands that intentional planning and design is an inherent feature of human consciousness. If we want to forcibly deny this feature, it is the most unnatural "artificial design."
What Hayek really wants to oppose is "rational conceit", which is the kind of omniscient and omnipotent plan that can completely eliminate ignorance.
It is precisely because planning activities are indelible that we should guard against the abuse of planning. Both Hayek and Popper remind us to be alert to rationality, not because it is not good, but because it is very good and useful, so we should be especially alert to its exaggeration and abuse.
Kant once said that the immature state of human beings is that they dare not openly and boldly use reason. Then Hayek further revealed that it is another kind of immaturity of human beings to conquer ignorance and eliminate all uncertainties with reason.
The real maturity of human beings is to face up to the ignorance that they can never get rid of completely while bravely using reason. Courage and uncertainty coexist.