Prawo spontanicznego porządku – Friedricha A. Hayeka koncepcja regulacji
Law of spontaneous order – Hayekian concept of regulation

Summary/Abstract: In the article three general questions were posed as a means of presenting explorative issue: (1) Law as regulation of an order; (2) Law as regulation of a liberty; (3) Controversy of social industry in law. In order to realize the issue thus outlined in the first section it has been shown two different and opposites kinds of orders in widely understanding term ‘sociology of law’ as well as Hayekian criticism of Descartes rationality. The structure of exogenous and endogenous orders has been carefully analysed in relation to their ancient equivalents: taxis and nomos. Special attention has been given to make an explanation of Hayekian understanding of legal frameworks connected with the process of organization and division of power. It has been outlined the rule of law in political system of Austrian economist (concept of demarchy) and his principal arguments for legislature and problem of ‘good regulation’. In the second part of thesis it has been shown a widely connection between spontaneous order and both liberty and the process of progression. In this section the strive was to present mostly values and good points in Hayekian conception, but there is also a critical part concerning both unsymmetrical constraint of freedom and symmetrical. In the third part of this thesis it has been shown the historical background of Hayekian research connected with the controversy of social industry in law. Referring to the intellectual dispute between Spencer’s organicism and Durkheim’s paternalistic conception Hayek has divided between law and law-making (legislation) and he has proved that law is only a spontaneous order notwithstanding good legislation means rules of harmonization and maintenance this kind of abstract social structure. Hayek’s concept of law is in accordance with philosophical, sociological, economical and political research of the general and popular nowadays problem with the new paternalism.

• Details
• Contents