"All political theories assume, of course, that most individuals are very ignorant. Those who plead for liberty differ from the rest in that they include among the ignorant themselves as well as the wisest." F.A. Hayek, The Constitution of LibertyIt seems counter-intuitive to suggest that the preservation and progress of civilization depends on a great amount of ignorance.
But it does.
As Hayek points out in chapter two of Constitution, The Creative Powers of A Free Civilization, societies should take seriously the Socratic admonition that ignorance is the beginning of wisdom. Doing so leads to the practical conclusion that freedom in society is the genesis of the advances in civilization we've come to take for granted. Freedom is also the best policy to ensure we preserve the progress already made and continue to progress and flourish.
For an individual to take the Socratic approach to wisdom, he or she recognizes they are ignorant about a great deal of life and do not presume to act upon knowledge they do not have. "I know what I do not know" is an excellent way to walk a path to greater understanding and avoid the trappings that await those less humbled by their ignorance.
As a society, it would greatly behoove us to admit so much and recognize that civilization has not made advances through carefully planned strategies and some guiding hand of experts endowed with accumulated knowledge. Believing so leads to the erroneous conclusion that there is a fixed amount of ignorance that can be conquered with the advance of science and that human activity can, and should, be efficiently arranged and ordered, and that society should be less free to go about in an uncoordinated way pursing respective self-interests through competitive capitalism.
Hayek reminds us:
"It is for this reason that those intoxicated by the advance of knowledge so often become the enemies of freedom."
Even a cursory view of the brutal totalitarian regimes of the twentieth-century are chilling historical testaments to the lengths to which such intoxication can lead.
Individually we benefit a great deal from the workings and knowledge of countless other individuals in society. I, for instance, am very much ignorant as to exactly how the bag of coffee beans I conveniently bought two miles from my home arrived there for me to purchase. How were they harvested, roasted, packed, shipped, distributed, trucked, promoted, sold, bought, arranged, etc., etc., etc.? And how does every business involved in this process operate, and how many other businesses and people are involved in how they respectively operate?
I don't know.
But I ignorantly bought and enjoyed he beans anyway, all because many, many people out there in society are individually pursing their own self interests and utilizing the knowledge they have and I do not. Multiply that one bag of coffee beans and the many people it required to deliver it to a shelf two miles from my house by the countless goods and services and countless more people and respective knowledge it requires to provide the current high standard of living for 300+ million Americans enjoy.
That is a lot of individual, respective knowledge spread out over a lot of people, and that equals a lot of collective ignorance as to how society has generated the advances we have come to take for granted.
What central board of experts could possibly command so much information? What person could possibly control just coffee beans?
Hence embracing ignorance and allowing for a maximum amount of liberty in society is the only way to preserve and ensure progress:
"Humiliating to human pride as it may be, we must recognize that the advance and even the preservation of civilization are dependent upon a maximum of opportunity for accidents to happen."Accidents are things we do not and cannot plan for. They are unseen and result in spite of our most carefully arranged plans. In a free society, these accidents are the discoveries and advances of civilization that government interferences, dictates, and regulations did not and cannot ever plan for.
As we face a future where our health care and personal property are headed for increased control by the federal government, it would be best to remind ourselves and Capital Hill there is a lot they do not know and a lot we know individually about what's best for our own health, lives, retirements, etc. Greater restrictions on our freedom to maintain the health of our bodies and the fruits of our labors would be societal regress, not progress consistent with the preservation of civilization.
If government is limited according to how much it does not know, and we are free order the welfare of our lives, we can confidently proclaim that ignorance, in this context, is a good thing.
You might even say it is bliss.
