Purpose - To defend my past work against the charge that it has exaggerated the importance of The Sensory Order or mistaken its proper role in Hayek's scholarship.Methodology/approach - I review the evidence given by D'Amico and Boettke and show that such evidence does not imply exaggeration or distortion regarding the nature and importance of The Sensory Order in Hayek's oeuvre. Findings - Hayek's The Sensory Order was very important, but you can understand his economics without having read it. Research limitations/implications - The paper only discusses some criticisms of my work on Hayek and a few related points. It does not provide a detailed or extensive account of either The Sensory Order or the role of that work in Hayek's economics.Originality/value of paper - The work is "original" because it defends my past work against a criticism that previously did not exist. My defense is valuable to the extent that the criticism of D'Amico and Boettke is considered relevant and interesting.
|Original language||English (US)|
|Number of pages||7|
|Journal||Advances in Austrian Economics|
|State||Published - Dec 1 2010|
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Economics and Econometrics