I am new to the site and relatively new to Austrian/Libertarian economics. Long story short, I am a PhD student in biomedical research and I was attracted to Austrian economics because the authors satisfied an aprioristic curiousity I wasn’t getting in the empirical “hard sciences.” I know Michael Polanyi (not to be confused with Karl Polanyi) is brought up from time to time in discussions in various Austrian circles, but I am a bit confused as to where exactly he is placed in such discussions. The concept that knowledge is tacit and personal applies to both a Hayekian view of calculation/dispersed knowledge AND discussions of non-emperical methodology (Misesian view of the a priori in economics, etc). So why do I keep hearing Polanyi being brought up? Where does he fit into the discussion? This is not clear to me (By “keep hearing” I literally mean hear. In this case I’m refering to FEE podcasts I’ve obsessively listened to over the past few months. I have several of these talks on my computer, so no used skimming them).
Also, I’m a bit surprised at Polanyi’s rejection of evolution. As a biologist, I disagree. Does anyone have any insight into the intellectual atmosphere of the 1950s that would encourage this view? I know he was very religious, so I’m sure that’s of some importance.
thanks…and I hope to become a regular on the site!
I’d say that Polanyi would rather be strongly against the idea that there are genes that control single functions of the organism… Here’s some more food for thought -