A bit of background: I was extremely skeptical of Austrian methodology at first, but gave the benefit of the doubt and read Human Action and followed up with Rothbard’s “In defense of extreme a priori”. There I basically discovered that my skepticism was because of critics strawmanning Austrians.
I just want to be sure that I’m following their methodology correctly:
-The single axiom of Action is a priori (I say a priori because although it can be a posteriori, “Humans Act” is self-evident)
-From this axiom, deductions are made (subjective value, time preference, &c.) and clarified because of the understanding (and accepting) of praxeology. *I realize certain concepts like subjective value and time preference were realized before the action axiom, but deducing from action can, as I’ve mentioned, clarify how and why subjective value, time preference, &c. work out the way they do, as action is necessarily praxeological.
*I understand these may be gross oversimplifications, but I’m basically breaking it down to make sure I get it before proceeding.
Sorry, this made sense when I was thinking it. Now that I can see it I’m feeling like I’m on the wrong track.