Is Ayn Rand’s empirism the same as logical positivism/utilitarianism? If so, why did she not deviate from pure lassiez faire and support some state intervention in her economics? cause I notice a lot of positivist economists are always tempted to support state intervention as long as it satisfies the criterion of efficiency.
In a video where Stefan Molyneux criticized Ayn Rand, he said that he bows down to the Rand when it comes to metaphysics and epistemology. So that would get one thinking that Stefan’s a pure empiricist but then heoften says that he follows praxeology because he always starts from first principles and integrate facts. What is his real epistemology?
I don’t think Rand is an empiricist or utilitarian. For one, she always talked up “rationalism” which is a product of the mind and somewhat the opposite of merely deducing from experience. Even though she is for evidence, of course. (It is a mistake to believe anyone is pure rational or pure empiricist, as this has an implication of either the inability towards induction or towards deduction). She also has an ethical system and one based on individualism, so she is not a utilitarian.
I think Stefan is up to date on Austrianism and quotes them a lot. But admits to not being an economist, but a philosopher. I think Rand, too, believed much in common with Mises. But they differed in what they thought their approach to understanding or explaining the importance of liberty. Mises tried for a value free economics, which would make philosophy not of much use. Rand had beliefs about what people aught to do and, like Rothbard, had ethical beliefs and beliefs about what constitutes a reasoned decision making (that isn’t merely a truism).
I think Stefan is probably more in line with synthesizing reason and empiricism. Similar to the scientific method. But that reason must bow to empiricism. It differs from positivism, because positivism says that there is no such thing as metaphysics or principles we can deduce from experience. August Comte believed that the positivist age usurped both the religious and Enlightenment metaphysical eras which he thought were necessary first stages towards the positivistic age in which things like God and ethics and so forth would not need to be discussed. It is merely a scientism with a methodology towards continued testing of variables and weighing models of existence against one another rather than asserting their absolute accuracy.