authors:
- Gaus, Gerald F
content: 'The focus of this multifaceted text is how the Open Society - a free, individualistic,
diverse, dynamic society - can work given human nature and the complexity of the
Open Society. It is organized as an investigation of what the author Gerald Gaus
calls Friedrich Hayek''s three unsettling theses: 1) That human nature has a tribal
and parochial egalitarian basis which fundamentally is in conflict with the Open
Society, and must be kept in check by it. 2) The Open Society is too complex to
be amenable to justification, i.e. rational analysis and criticism. 3) The complexity
of the Open Society is such that conscious human control and governance is impossible.
At most, the state can provide the framework for the openness of the Open Society.
Basically, the project that Gaus embarks on is to make a more optimistic case for
the Open Society by critically discussing, and to some extent refuting Hayek''s
theses.
Gaus'' argument concerning Hayek''s first thesis takes into account the advances
in understanding of the evolutionary history of Homo sapiens that has taken place
during the last 30 or so years. He notes that the idea that morality has sprung
out of the needs of the hypersocial human animal during its evolution has become
commonplace. In Gaus'' view, political philosophy must now be discussed with explicit
reference to human nature as nowadays understood in an evolutionary context. This
includes the fact that humans are a fundamentally cultural species, which has many
important ramifications. Gaus argues that human sociality is based on cooperation
and that there are strong forces in it that drive towards inclusion, impartiality
and self-organization which Hayek did not take into account, and which undermine
Hayek''s first thesis that human nature is at odds with the Open Society.
Gaus'' argument on the second and third of Hayek''s theses uses a range of arguments
from different fields. It is a complex text, which is hard to summarize. It has
many interesting threads, and requires much thinking on the part of the reader.
The upshot is that Hayek did have many valid points, but that there is actually
considerable space for both critical evaluation of society, and for attempts at
reforming it consciously.
Although Gaus uses the term Open Society, which Karl Popper made famous, his account
is almost wholly based on Hayek''s evolutionary view of a free society - what Hayek
called the Great Society. Although he refers to Popper in some passages, he is clear
that he considers Hayek''s analysis superior to Popper''s. But, somewhat strangely,
Gaus ends up in a position which is more similar to Popper''s; he does not use the
term, but he views social engineering - which Popper argued for - in a more positive
light than Hayek. Now, it is clear that Popper did not flesh out his analysis of
the Open Society very much; Gaus does a lot more work in this regard. But still,
some discussion about the fact that Gaus'' position ends up closer to Popper than
to Hayek would have been useful.
The text is dense, and it draws on arguments from a broad range of scientific fields,
such as anthropoly, primatology, psychology, cultural studies of various kinds,
economics, game theory and complexity theory. This makes the book rather hard to
read, even though the language in itself is not that difficult. There is just so
much in it! Some issues are investigated through formalized analysis, which occasionally
provides more clarity, in others not. This book cannot be recommended to the average
politically interested person. Someone else needs to write a popular version of
Gaus'' account.
In these days, when the Open Society is threatened from many directions, it is somewhat
startling to read the end of Gaus'' text, where he is confident about the future:
"For a time, opponents of diversity and openness may check exploration, creativity,
diversity, and freedom, but the forces propelling the new civilization proclaimed
by Popper and Hayek cannot long be contained." It should be noted that Popper did
not take this for granted at all. One may hope that Gaus'' optimistic conclusion
will turn out to be well-founded.
'
date: '2022-10-04'
edition:
published: '2021'
publisher: Oxford University Press
goodreads: '57924532'
html: '<p>The focus of this multifaceted text is how the Open Society - a free, individualistic,
diverse, dynamic society - can work given human nature and the complexity of the
Open Society. It is organized as an investigation of what the author Gerald Gaus
calls Friedrich Hayek''s three unsettling theses: 1) That human nature has a tribal
and parochial egalitarian basis which fundamentally is in conflict with the Open
Society, and must be kept in check by it. 2) The Open Society is too complex to
be amenable to justification, i.e. rational analysis and criticism. 3) The complexity
of the Open Society is such that conscious human control and governance is impossible.
At most, the state can provide the framework for the openness of the Open Society.
Basically, the project that Gaus embarks on is to make a more optimistic case for
the Open Society by critically discussing, and to some extent refuting Hayek''s
theses.</p>
<p>Gaus'' argument concerning Hayek''s first thesis takes into account the advances
in understanding of the evolutionary history of Homo sapiens that has taken place
during the last 30 or so years. He notes that the idea that morality has sprung
out of the needs of the hypersocial human animal during its evolution has become
commonplace. In Gaus'' view, political philosophy must now be discussed with explicit
reference to human nature as nowadays understood in an evolutionary context. This
includes the fact that humans are a fundamentally cultural species, which has many
important ramifications. Gaus argues that human sociality is based on cooperation
and that there are strong forces in it that drive towards inclusion, impartiality
and self-organization which Hayek did not take into account, and which undermine
Hayek''s first thesis that human nature is at odds with the Open Society.</p>
<p>Gaus'' argument on the second and third of Hayek''s theses uses a range of arguments
from different fields. It is a complex text, which is hard to summarize. It has
many interesting threads, and requires much thinking on the part of the reader.
The upshot is that Hayek did have many valid points, but that there is actually
considerable space for both critical evaluation of society, and for attempts at
reforming it consciously.</p>
<p>Although Gaus uses the term Open Society, which Karl Popper made famous, his
account is almost wholly based on Hayek''s evolutionary view of a free society -
what Hayek called the Great Society. Although he refers to Popper in some passages,
he is clear that he considers Hayek''s analysis superior to Popper''s. But, somewhat
strangely, Gaus ends up in a position which is more similar to Popper''s; he does
not use the term, but he views social engineering - which Popper argued for - in
a more positive light than Hayek. Now, it is clear that Popper did not flesh out
his analysis of the Open Society very much; Gaus does a lot more work in this regard.
But still, some discussion about the fact that Gaus'' position ends up closer to
Popper than to Hayek would have been useful.</p>
<p>The text is dense, and it draws on arguments from a broad range of scientific
fields, such as anthropoly, primatology, psychology, cultural studies of various
kinds, economics, game theory and complexity theory. This makes the book rather
hard to read, even though the language in itself is not that difficult. There is
just so much in it! Some issues are investigated through formalized analysis, which
occasionally provides more clarity, in others not. This book cannot be recommended
to the average politically interested person. Someone else needs to write a popular
version of Gaus'' account.</p>
<p>In these days, when the Open Society is threatened from many directions, it is
somewhat startling to read the end of Gaus'' text, where he is confident about the
future: "For a time, opponents of diversity and openness may check exploration,
creativity, diversity, and freedom, but the forces propelling the new civilization
proclaimed by Popper and Hayek cannot long be contained." It should be noted
that Popper did not take this for granted at all. One may hope that Gaus'' optimistic
conclusion will turn out to be well-founded.</p>
'
isbn: '9780190648978'
language: en
lastmod: '2022-10-04'
path: /library/gaus-2021.html
published: '2021'
rating: 4
reference: Gaus 2021
reviewed: '2022-10-04'
subjects:
- human-evolution
- liberalism
- political-philosophy
title: The Open Society and Its Complexities
type: book
year: 2021