Religion and Austrian Economics

[Knight_of_BAAWA]

@Chris

Faith is what enables us to feel the love of God/Jesus, thus if a person who does not believe claims it is “non-existant” based on a priori reasoning this is a fallacy because they would not know because they have no faith.

That statement shows you do not know what a priori means. It means “true independent of observation”. It DOES NOT MEAN “reject beforehand”.

[Jon_Irenicus]

Jon, you’re missing my point. Which was merely that people tend to assume that the action axiom is stronger than it is. To point is that the axiom is just an assumption, and unlike the mainstream neoclassical assumptions of perfect “rationality”, information etc. it’s fairly accurate. But the validity of it depends on that country in question. It’s not impossible for there to exist a society populated by robots, children and the mentally retarded and if there were, it would be incorrect to use Austrian theory to analyze it. Which, as Mises claimed, is the point of economics.

No, I comprehend and agree with the point.

As concerns falsifiability, I think we’re using different definitions of term. I’m using it in the Popperian sense.

What matters is that the theories are revisable.

[Laughing_Man]

@Jon Irenicus

oreover, any attempt for you personally to deny it would lapse into contradiction so it at least personally provable

Well I know one individual on this forum who denies such an action.

[hayekianxyz]

@Jon Irenicus

What matters is that the theories are revisable.

I know, I agree with this. I wasn’t making a criticism of Austrian methodology, what I was saying was that the action axiom isn’t falsifiable in the usually understood, Popperian sense of the word. To a Popperian, Austrian economics should be considered alongside Freudian and Addlerian (I don’t know if they’re words) psychology.