George H. Smith examines the problem of whether the human sciences can be value-free, and if so in what sense.
George H. Smith explores various ways in which ideas influence human action, and why ideas are essential to the success of libertarianism.
George H. Smith, drawing from Machiavelli’s The Prince, discusses two essential ingredients of successful states.
George H. Smith explains the meaning of “society” and “institution,” and he discusses the distinction between designed and undesigned institutions.
George H. Smith discusses some preliminary issues involved in the classic libertarian distinction between the spheres of “state” and “society.”
George H. Smith examines the common claim that the mere threat of physical force does not qualify as a type of coercion.
George H. Smith discusses the distinction between freedom and coercion, and explains some of its implications for the human sciences.
George H. Smith presents an overview of the philosophy of the human sciences.
Defending freedom requires an interdisciplinary approach, so George H. Smith turns to the “human sciences”—and also to a definition of science itself.
George H. Smith explores Humboldt’s defense of individuality, written in 1792.
George H. Smith discusses Adam Smith’s views on a standing army and his arguments for competition in education.
George Smith explores Adam Smith’s views on Columbus, smuggling, and education.
George Smith discusses Adam Smith’s views on sin taxes and slavery.
George H. Smith discusses Adam Smith’s social, political, and moral objections to governmental interference in the economy as found in the Wealth of Nations.
George H. Smith explains what Adam Smith meant by the “invisible hand” and how he used this explanatory method throughout his writings.
George H. Smith discusses the significant role played by John Chapman in the lives of Herbert Spencer, George Eliot, and G. H. Lewes.
George H. Smith criticizes an influential book by Mark Francis, Herbert Spencer and the Invention of Modern Life.
George H. Smith discusses the complex personal relationships among three leading classical liberals in Victorian England.