In Richard Epstein’s “The Continuing Relevance of Hayek The Constitution of Liberty”, he states that by following the law of diminishing marginal returns correctly specialization turns out to be losing proposition. The Roman law he believes has shaped everything that he has done and that Hayek was the same way. Epstein states that The Constitution of Liberty managed to keep technical information outside of the book and it has a synthetic framework to look at law. A point that was described in the conversation was that Hayek was aware that if you just have a rule of law and no substance of components within that particular situation it would not be sufficient. Generalizations are a source of danger. A solution that was stated was that you need to find a substantive norm in combination with a rule of law and then it will be sufficient. Another element that was stated in order for a legal system to work is there has to be institutional structures where rights are embedded. A point …show more content…
It was stated that coercion is more complicated than force because it includes the threat and use of force. An idea that was stated was that we prefer the state of world where we have intuitions in a stable environment. Hayek starts to develop what he means by coercion, which is that there are two extremes. The Roman law had a contract law to resolve a number of disputes in the future. This is when you give people complete freedom to choose an arrangement and if you get a dispute you document it and it is easier to resolve. When you give the option of a refusal of deal is only the thing that makes a competitive market work. I was not aware before this talk that the ability to walk away and private exit drives these actions but if you have force one losses more than the other. Another idea that was discussed was that necessity suspends all forms of property rights in Hayek’s view but does not include the