Compelling analysis of key humanity fundamentals

Hayek is demystifying some of socialism 's fundamental misconceptions oferring a compelling view on some of humanity's fundamental elements such as language, property, market and religion. A must read.

13 people found this helpful

It's not all within the capacity of reason

If you could sum up The Fatal Conceit in three words, what would they be?

Reason isn't king

What was the most compelling aspect of this narrative?

The idea that humans are so adaptable and ingenious that they have developed a way to organize themselves and cooperate to improve their condition that is beyond the bounds of reason alone. It is a subtle idea, that we can actually use our reason cooperatively, and not know how things come to be in an advanced order. For instance, listening to this audiobook on an iPhone. No one person has the knowledge to do this all by himself. It takes thousands of people co-operating in their little spheres of knowledge to make the whole.

Any additional comments?

I think this is the case against rationalism, meaning that our reason and rationality guide every single that we do. We can only know so much, and things like culture, tradition, morality, and unspoken rules of behavior for which we may not have the understanding of why they are there, are very important economizers that allow us to do greater and greater things within a complicated society. It makes the case that we have to make the most important decision in our lives as well, and it also makes the case that liberty is not the atomistic individualism and permissiveness of an extreme libertarian, but that which is based in property, and respect for property. Those were the 3 things that dominated the book, and were explained exceptionally well--the limits of rationalism, the case for culture, and liberty being based in property being very important.

5 people found this helpful

His foray into philosophy not as good as economics

This book contains literally minutes worth of gemstones about economics and empirical observation scattered within it's hours and hours of arbitrary philosophy and baseless modern-humanist conjecture. I was disappointed, how could an author so brilliant at assessing economics do so poorly in assessing philosophy and the nature of humankind? I get it, he's trying to persuade other modern-humanists and he's relying on what is religion to them - evolution, metaphysical naturalism, philosophical materialism, etc. And in a book I thought should spend 95% of it's time refuting the fatal conceit that science can engineer societal and economic outcomes, and be maybe 5% humanist philosophy if Hayek really wanted to go there, he instead spends 95% of his time on arbitrary philosophy, and only 5% of his time covering the economic and empirical problems of the fatal conceit. In this way the book is ironic; in believing he can address human nature and morality purely through modern-humanist philosophy Hayek is succumbing to his own fatal conceit, which I believe allows the rest of modern humanism to easily refute him in their own minds and continue their own societal engineering fatal conceits. I see this as a missed opportunity. Still there are enough gemstones scattered in chapters 6 and 8 (alone) on the Audiobook version to make it worth picking up this title for a free-market economics purist.

3 people found this helpful

A classic work of seroous philosophy

A powerful work of philosophy and anthropology. If what you are looking for is an antisocialist rant, don't: this is serious, hardcore philosophy

3 people found this helpful

If more had these insights we'd be better off

If you could sum up The Fatal Conceit in three words, what would they be?

Those who seek big government socialism are fooling themselves and those who they wish to take with them to these ends, It doesn't work, can't work and still here we go in an attempt to get there!

What was the most compelling aspect of this narrative?

How straight forward the truth is and how solid the facts are that socialism fails and why our current President's agenda is so devoid of legitimacy.

Did you have an extreme reaction to this book? Did it make you laugh or cry?

My reaction was one of frustration over why our country's voters can't understand that our President's agenda to force us into socialism is so wrong and yet over half voted for more of the same...

14 people found this helpful

Try to keep up!

Would you recommend this audiobook to a friend? If so, why?

Yes. The Fatal Conceit is a significant work by a significant author - and is relevant in so many ways today still. It will definitely improve anyone's understanding of important economic concepts that has a fundamental impact on most of society today.

Who was your favorite character and why?

Not applicable.

What does Everett Sherman bring to the story that you wouldn’t experience if you just read the book?

I struggled to get used to the narrator's way of speaking. The intonation of his voice appears to fade towards the end of sentences which is common for conversation but made it difficult for me to listen to in anything less than ideal (quiet) surroundings. I either got used to it after a while or it improved as the reading progresses.

Was this a book you wanted to listen to all in one sitting?

No. This book is something you should give yourself nothing more than about 30 mins of listening at a time. There are some seriously complex topics and one's attention span could easily slip if you listen for too long.

Any additional comments?

Even as a capitalist, Hayek challenges many of my ideas of politics, society and even religion. He exposes many concepts that are neither intuitive nor immediately obvious. I also had to admit defeat to understanding many concepts which I held in high regard for many years related to society and the nature of man.

2 people found this helpful

The case for free markets and against socialism

Hayek is a Nobel laureate in economics. I have previously written a review here of Hayek's The Road to Serfdom which was first released in 1943/1944. The Fatal Conceit was released 45 years later in 1988, 4 years before the death of Fredrich A Hayek. As the full title of The Fatal Conceit indicates, Hayek takes on the foolishness of socialism in much greater detail than he did in The Road to Serfdom. Of course he had 45 more years of additional real world failures of socialism in 1988 than he had in 1943.

In my review of The Road to Serfdom I discuss more about Hayek's philosophy and life which I will not repeat here. But on the topic of political and economic philosophy it is important to properly classify Hayek as a classical liberal rather than a conservative. There is a wonderful essay Hayek wrote in 1960 titled "Why I am not a conservative" that is not copyrighted and is readily available on the web.

I'm unimpressed by the narration of the audiobook. The subject matter deserves better.

8 people found this helpful

A Humanist Book

In as much as I am a Christian, this books overarching, and underlying content was to promulgate F.A. Hayek's existential, and humanist philosophy. Though I most certainly cannot change this; these proved to be sources of annoyance as the book unfolded.

Everett Sherman's reading of "The Fatal Conceit" had the subtle undertones of a young man who "warmly" agreed with its content. As stated above, the obvious intent of Mr. Hayek (in my view), was to present his humanistic predilections. And as I also stated above, as a Christian, I cannot share in this predisposition. I am a "humane" person, but not a humanist.

4 people found this helpful

Worth the effort

This is a brilliant, yes brilliant, review, not simply of economics, but of human history.
Save your thousands of dollars, if you want a real liberal education. Start with this, Murray Rothbard if you are really ambitious. Add Thucydides,

Should be a college course

Absolutely brilliant capture of the dynamics which both underpin the advance of mankind and dictate the inevitable failure of all socialist artifice. Elected officials and university educators may not align with Hayek’s observations and conclusions, due to their own passionate biases, but a precondition of their employment should be to at least read and understand this book PRIOR to assuming their (fiduciary) duties.