Agency, adaptation, and discussion in liberal societies: Lessons from Frank H. Knight

Abstract This article examines some of the distinct features of Frank H. Knight’s liberalism. While acknowledging the necessity of markets and competition, Knight critiques their potential to shape people’s preferences and foster problematic values, such as excessive rivalry and materialism, that threaten individual agency and social cohesion. For Knight, individual agency means more than merely exercising competence in achieving pre-determined preferences. He defends an expansive idea of agency as self-constitution—a dynamic process of self-creation and preference formation. This process contrasts with adaptation, a largely unconscious phenomenon through which individuals internalize the norms and values of their socio-economic environment. Following Knight’s analysis, the article identifies a dual challenge posed by adaptation: the risk of ethically questionable preferences arising under flawed norms and the lack of individual agency even under liberal ideals. Knight’s remedy lies in fostering deliberate, open-ended public discussion, where individuals engage in collaborative reasoning to develop and critically assess their preferences. The paper draws lessons from Knight’s analysis for institutional design and deliberative practices, while also highlighting questions for future research on how to implement Knight’s vision of discursive liberalism.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Constitutional Political Economy
Published
2025-09-04
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10602-025-09478-z
Citations
4
Primary Topic
Political Philosophy and Ethics
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
34.09

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Agency, adaptation, and discussion in liberal societies: Lessons from Frank H. Knight

Malte Dold
4 citations
Constitutional Political Economy
Political Philosophy and Ethics
34.09
article

Agency, adaptation, and discussion in liberal societies: Lessons from Frank H. Knight

Malte Dold
article en
4 citations

Abstract

Abstract This article examines some of the distinct features of Frank H. Knight’s liberalism. While acknowledging the necessity of markets and competition, Knight critiques their potential to shape people’s preferences and foster problematic values, such as excessive rivalry and materialism, that threaten individual agency and social cohesion. For Knight, individual agency means more than merely exercising competence in achieving pre-determined preferences. He defends an expansive idea of agency as self-constitution—a dynamic process of self-creation and preference formation. This process contrasts with adaptation, a largely unconscious phenomenon through which individuals internalize the norms and values of their socio-economic environment. Following Knight’s analysis, the article identifies a dual challenge posed by adaptation: the risk of ethically questionable preferences arising under flawed norms and the lack of individual agency even under liberal ideals. Knight’s remedy lies in fostering deliberate, open-ended public discussion, where individuals engage in collaborative reasoning to develop and critically assess their preferences. The paper draws lessons from Knight’s analysis for institutional design and deliberative practices, while also highlighting questions for future research on how to implement Knight’s vision of discursive liberalism.

Constitutional Political Economy
Pomona College (US)
Pomona College
Openalex Percentile: Top 0%
Political Philosophy and Ethics
34.09
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.