To George Dalton (3 February 1959)

Text in English to type

[…] [2] He [Gailbraith] has helped me to clarify what I meant in saying that a technological society can afford to be free.

As to the ‘accountancy’ issue let us guard from the fallacy of overprecision. Market accountancy is (formally) infinitely precise. It is very doubtful whether this quality is relevant to the problem. To give you an example technological calculations are essentially imprecise. Their money expression (which is infinitely precise) covers up the instable imprecision of all technological formulae (in contrast [3] to mathematical physics which is precise). The degree of precision provided by market method of calculation is far beyond the requirements. Only if the system-problems is given preference over the actual immediate, practical problem does the Mises thesis apply with its insistence on the impossibility of accountancy outside of the competitive market. There is a sense in which is absolutely right. The question is only whether it is also relevant to the actual needs to requirements.

Now, I agree with you entirely about the [4] impossibility of even formally calculating the costs of most interventions. Granted this to be so, the real question arises to what extent are margins of error calculable (which is the method applied in technology).

-- Written on the envelope: “to what extent are margins of error calculable?”

Letter Information

Reference:
KPA: 50/04, 44-49