Originally published in Journal of Private Enterprise
This essay contends that Kirzner’s efforts to be categorical and to avoid looseness are unsuccessful and argue that looseness inheres in the economic discussion of the most important things, and associate that viewpoint with Adam Smith.
In keeping with the praxeological style of discourse, Kirzner claims that his notion of coordination can be used as a clear-cut criterion of economic goodness. Kirzner wishes to claim that gainful entrepreneurial action in the market is always coordinative. This essay contends that Kirzner’s efforts to be categorical and to avoid looseness are unsuccessful and argue that looseness inheres in the economic discussion of the most important things, and associate that viewpoint with Adam Smith. We suggest that Hayek is much closer to Smith than to Mises, and that Kirzner’s invocations of Hayek’s discussions of coordination are spurious.
Read the article at the Journal of Private Enterprise.
