One axiom of praxeology is that “humans prefer more of a good to less.”
Does this imply that Austrians find optimization theory congenial to their framework? That is, doesn’t this imply that Mises’s claim that we are seeking “satisfaction” also mean we want more satisfaction rather than less, leading to a generic sort of utility-maximization to be optimized.
I think you are forgetting the subjectivity in all that.
It’s not an axiom, it’s a theorem. There’s a difference.
As for your “optimization theory” it sounds like you’re describing simple economizing.
Then the page is wrong. That people prefer more of a good to less is a direct consequence of the action axiom (because, if they preferred less of a good to more, then the maximum utility could be obtained by having nothing), but this doesn’t mean it IS an axiom itself.
Though for reading the above explanation it should be noted the Austrian definition of a good is a bit different from how other schools of economics define it. Austrians define a good as basically a means toward an end. Multiple different types of things can be the same good, and the same thing can serve multiple purposes (thus be multiple goods at once).
As Rothbard describes it, the Law of Total Utility (the utility of a bigger sized unit is ranked higher than the utility of a smaller sized unit) is a fundamental feature of human action. In addition, Austrians also stress that individuals always seek to “maximize utility”. However, Austrian terminology is different from mainstream terminology, and while in neoclassical economics utility maximization refers to a cardinal idea of utility (individual assigns 5 apples 2 utility, and 8 apples 4 utility, so if they are costless then the individual should go for the 8 apples) in austrian economics it means attaining the highest possible utility ranking.