I’ve entered into a discussion on science-related forums arguing over Austrian methodology. Naturally, the biggest challenges come from epistemology; the fact that the methodology is axiomatic and adverse to empirical testing and the hypothetico-deductive model. I’m reading Rothbards “The Mantle of…

Mr. Positivist writes in your debate, ““controlled experiments (and extrapolation of their outcomes) is a much thornier issue in the social sciences than in, say, physics.” These people never cease to amaze me. It’s not “thornier” issue, it’s an entirely different ballgame. But never mind that, the…

No they’re not and it does, I meant that the necessary praxeological assumptions are assumed as well as the fact that property rights are enforced, this is a specific case of praxeology, although praxeology still applies in societies in which property righs are not enforced, however a precurssor to…

We are empiricists…radical ones at that. Scientific method =/= empiricism. In a way, many of us could even be accused of…gasp…scientism. We just acknowledge things from a more inter-subjective German continental point of view rather than British empiricism.

So what? You said you could derive markets from praxeology and now you’re not. And everything purposeful is a special case of praxeology. This does not mean your explanation of it DEPENDS on praxeology. Empirically there is no way to prove that a specific ocurrance is an “action”, because you’re …

Sieben I think I finally understand where you err, and it’s that you don’t understand the way that praxeology is used. To my knowledge no one ever claimed that they could derive any concrete proofs of the actions of men a priori, applied praxeology is the only type that can tell us anything about t…

I’m not in error. I knew the right answer all along. You either misunderstood or are shifting your goalposts back so you can look like you achieved your goal. What does something have to be to count as “instinct”? I’m inclined to say that a large portion of behaviour is uhh… not 100% conscious. …

What you quoted doesn’t deal in any way with the second thing you quoted. The fact is that Austrians do use praxeology to construct proofs and I showed you how below as well as including a fairly thorough passage from a half century document which is still the authority on Austrian economics so it’…

Yes it does. You think that just because Austrians use praxeological vocabulary it means they are using it to derive things. But in your example, you just stapled a bunch of hypothetical non praxeological stipulations to a few praxeological definitions, didn’t employ them (hint: if human beings act…

Sieben, I see little point in actually continuing this discussion because of the fact that your last paragraph makes it obvious that you have already decided the conclusion. All I’m going to say is that just because of the fact that praxeology needs to be employed by other things. Of course I made a…

Debating Austrian Methodology with Positivist-Empiricists

Economics Economics Questions

vive_la_insurrection August 28, 2011, 1:14pm 37

I just came acroos this papaer today, this may help you out:

https://forum.freecapitalists.org/t/leeson-boetteke-paper-on-misean-methodology/20722

Topic		Replies	Views
How can Austrians test or prove their theories? Economics Questions	25	3513	September 18, 2009
Critique of Austrian Economics Economics Questions	24	3701	July 19, 2009
Positivism and Austrianism Economics Questions	10	2519	April 12, 2009
Austrianism = unscientific Economics Questions	98	26232	March 3, 2009
Is the Austrian School the Creationism of Economics? Economics Questions economics , austrian-school , creationism	15	6586	May 2, 2013

Debating Austrian Methodology with Positivist-Empiricists

Related topics