We know that it is hated by positivists from Friedman to Keynes. We also know it is criticized for being unscientific and deductive in its formulation. It is not derived by the scientific method, per se. It is a claim about the pretense of knowledge: of price signals, of the how interest rates work,…

why bemoan the absence of ‘new knowledge’ when ‘old knowledge’ works fine?. and haven’t you laid a trap for all knowledge increasing endeavours, that rely on the rational mind?. for at the point when you want to begin to use your deductive faculties, and do logical theorising,from your premises (whi…

Its new to the people discovering it. Even if it were not new, it would still be knowledge. But to move the conversation forward, you can’t make apodictic statements about the future of the market. You can say that we observed X ocurring in the past etc… I don’t know what your criterion for knowle…

You’re right that I’m casting a doubt on all rationalistic knowledge as genuine knowledge about an external world. I’m very Quinean, actually. For your second paragraph, I believe someone might believe that he or she has attained new knowledge by pondering a pearl of a priori reasoning; however, w…

I don’t believe in apodictic statements, period! My “criterion for knowledge” is replacement naturalism: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalized_epistemology .

You’re right that I’m casting a doubt on all rationalistic knowledge as genuine knowledge about an external world. I’m very Quinean, actually. So it seems you aren’t putting any opposing methodology or body of knowledge regarding economics above the Austrian tradition after all? you are rather …

Yes, you have misunderstood me. I stated I was Quinean, who is chiefly remembered as being one of the fiercest advocates of natural science within the tradition of analytic philosophy. I am placing neoclassical (empirical) methodology above the Austrian tradition. I am not calling economics a dism…

“The Hayek-Mises explanation of the business cycle is contradicted by the evidence. It is, I believe, false.” – Milton Friedman Friedman later admitted that the ABCT may be, at least partially, valid.

That’s like saying, “All bachelors are unmarried.” It’s playing with words, a tautology. Firstly, it’s an axiom. Secondly, it is not inherent in the meaning of the words “human action” that it is purposeful behaviour. It is a conceptual analysis. I know some people think these can’t exist and rev…

Jon Irenicus, the word “action” presupposes purposeful behavior. How can one take Quine seriously? Well, considering he is one of the most respected philosophers of the 20th century, how can one not? He has passed “the market test” far better than Austrian economics! Quinean epistemology has a sim…

Is ABCT 'postmodern'?

Economics Economics Questions

Lilburne August 2, 2010, 4:47pm 78

Neoclassical, here’s a thread for our debate.

Topic		Replies	Views
Why isn't ABCT more generally accepted? Economics Questions	123	21356	February 5, 2010
Recommendation on books about ABCT Economics Questions	14	2817	April 7, 2013
Anything to Take Away from Postmodernism? General	14	4300	February 25, 2011
Wiki and the ABCT Economics Questions anarcho-capitalism , business-cycle , krugman-keynes , business-cycles , krugman	28	5838	August 24, 2010
Defending the ABCT Economics Questions	8	1896	August 20, 2009

Is ABCT 'postmodern'?

Related topics