ȃȀȅ Partʺʺ: Politics and Philosophyor created in some more literal and pedestrian way. One might even ques-
tion a person’s Lockean self-ownership of his own body. After all, John
Rawls (ȀȈȆȀ) argued that each person’s physical and mental capacities are
in some respects a morally arbitrary gift of nature and the environment
and so are properly at the disposal of society in general.
I myself do not deny a person’s entitlement to his body and his cre-
ations; I do not agree with Rawls. I object, though, to prematurely rest-
ing judgments on such issues on undiscussable sheer intuitions. Ļe judg-
ments in question are notfundamentalvalue judgments (to use a term
that will become clearer in what follows). Ļey are relatively specific judg-
ments that themselves require grounding in the facts of reality and in one
or more value judgments that are more nearly fundamental.śŞŕœŕŚ ōŚŐ ōŜŜŞōŕşōŘ śŒ őŠŔŕŏōŘ ŕŚŠšŕŠŕśŚş
Appraising capitalism on ethical grounds necessarily involves both the
facts about how the system operates and the ethical standards themselves.
Kirzner specializes, quite legitimately, in the positive economics of the
issue; but room remains to consider the sources and force of the prevail-
ing ethical intuitions taken for granted in his writings reviewed here.
Where did these intuitions come from? It seems plausible to trace
them to social and perhaps biological evolution: acting in accordance with
them conferred advantages on societies and individuals. On the account of
F.A. Hayek (ȀȈȇȈand other writings), practices based on those intuitions
have stood the test of social and perhaps biological evolution. Groups
adhering to ethical precepts and institutions and kinds of behavior con-
ducive to survival of the group and reproduction of its members do tend
to flourish, while others wither. Groups have a better chance to prosper
under traditions that conduce to the accumulation of wealth and to trade,
including trade with outsiders. Ļese traditions concern private property,
saving, voluntary exchange, truthfulness, promise-keeping, and contract.
Favorable traditions gain ground not only through transmission to succes-
sive generations but also by being imitated.ȁ
ȁHayek knows that cultural natural selection works through trial and error and
through mere tendencies toward eventual decline of societies with inexpedient institu-
tions and traditions—unless they reform themselves, perhaps by imitating more successful
societies. He thereby recognizes that errors do occur and can persist. He also knows that
deliberate attention, within a society, to how well or poorly its institutions are functioning
plays a role in the evolutionary process. Still, the process as a whole is not directed by a