Neoliberalism’s knowledge limits are anti-positivist and extend beyond economics

Evidence

As a result, the neoliberal argument about the superiority of a market economy was predicated upon an epistemology which distinguished between spheres of lawful exact knowledge, and spheres where precise knowledge was impossible because it remained dispersed, tacit, and opaque. This assumption accounted for much of the anti-positivist and anti-reductionist position shared by neoliberals, as well as their insistence upon the observation of actions rather than the sociological scanning of intentions. First rolled out in the analysis of the economic order, these epistemological ground rules were later extended by analogy to all “spontaneously arising orders”: common law, language, aesthetics, traditions, etc. By the end of the 1930s, the socialist calculation debate had been reframed in terms of the defence of liberalism against totalitarianism, giving political leverage to epistemological arguments which had been originally devised to discredit the idea of economic planning. Far from evident at the outset, this recoding has become a hallmark of neoliberal thinking. — Dieter Plehwe, Quinn Slobodian & Philip Mirowski (eds.), Nine Lives of Neoliberalism, 74

Categorization

• DEFINE: Clarifies how the dispersed/tacit knowledge epistemology defines the neoliberal position — including its anti-positivism and extension to spontaneous orders like common law and language.
• XREF: connects to: Neoliberalism is best understood as open questions with a constant goal — Dieter Plehwe, Quinn Slobodian & Philip Mirowski (eds.), Nine Lives of Neoliberalism, 162; Neoliberalism’s scientific framing made knowledge and truth political questions — Dieter Plehwe, Quinn Slobodian & Philip Mirowski (eds.), Nine Lives of Neoliberalism, 54; Neoliberal anti-planning arguments rest on the dispersal and tacit character of social knowledge. — Dieter Plehwe, Quinn Slobodian & Philip Mirowski (eds.), Nine Lives of Neoliberalism, 71 (+10 more)

Broader Connections

• Neoliberals rejected the sociology of knowledge as hostile to scientific objectivity #corroborates (0.85) — Dieter Plehwe, Quinn Slobodian & Philip Mirowski (eds.), Nine Lives of Neoliberalism, 87
• Neoliberalism’s critique of rival ideologies drew on epistemological conventionalism #corroborates (0.85) — Dieter Plehwe, Quinn Slobodian & Philip Mirowski (eds.), Nine Lives of Neoliberalism, 62
• Early neoliberalism built its social theory on a market-modeled epistemology of dispersed tacit knowledge #exemplifies (0.82) — Dieter Plehwe, Quinn Slobodian & Philip Mirowski (eds.), Nine Lives of Neoliberalism, 82
• Neoliberalism reframed politics as an epistemological question of what can be known #expands (0.80) — Dieter Plehwe, Quinn Slobodian & Philip Mirowski (eds.), Nine Lives of Neoliberalism, 54
• Neoliberalism fused philosophy of science and political economy against totalitarianism #expands (0.78) — Dieter Plehwe, Quinn Slobodian & Philip Mirowski (eds.), Nine Lives of Neoliberalism, 53
• Neoliberalism’s deliberate epistemic inconsistencies enabled its long-term success #corroborates (0.78)
• Neoliberalism absorbed natural-science metaphors to become a comprehensive worldview beyond economics #expands (0.75) — Philip Mirowski, Never Let a Serious Crisis Go to Waste, 153
• Neoliberals understood the organizational nature of knowledge better than their critics did #expands (0.72) — Philip Mirowski & Dieter Plehwe (eds.), The Road from Mont Pèlerin, 2117
• Treating culture and economics as separate spheres misreads how neoliberalism operates #complicates (0.72) — Philip Mirowski, Never Let a Serious Crisis Go to Waste, 298