Axioms are taken on faith.
How does one “prove” that humans act, or even exhibit behaviour?
Axioms are taken on faith.
How does one “prove” that humans act, or even exhibit behaviour?
Right, the closest ‘proof’ we have of this are empirical observations.
Yeah, observations. But how to tell the difference between behaviour and action, and the properties of any specific action. Where is the theory of this? Rothbard only says that its a general observation that man makes of himself that he acts(the aristotelean foundation of action). But that does not tell us how to determine this in other conditions.
I don’t see the problem. perhaps illustrate it?
The walking example earlier in the thread..
Yeah, still not seeing any problem
I walk to to break room to get a cup of coffee. You’re right, I don’t think about my steps on the way there, my action is at this moment “get a cup of coffee”. Usually it plays out that way, but sometimes while taking one of my steps on the way, someone calls out to me, or I see someone in their cube that reminds me of something, so I stop to do something else. The step “that I didn’t take”, proves that really each step along the way was an action.
I think you’re grappling with the general “fractal problem” which can admittedly get very frustrating, e.g. “How long is a coastline”, and “If you look close enough, you cant tell when my finger ends and the air around it begins”.
HTH, John
You seem to want to aggregate smaller decisions into a larger one for convenience, but then speak as though the aggregated sum is now the smallest possible unit of action, which is not true.
While it is certainly convenient to think of “taking a walk” instead of “step one”, “step two”, etc. you can’t then wave away consideration of those steps simply because you’ve decided to label a series of actions as “taking a walk”. You can only aggregate the actions into a larger whole if the smaller parts don’t matter for the purposes of your discussion. They need not be discussed in such a case, but they are still there. If, however, your discussion becomes one where the individual steps actually matter then they must be considered as actions in their own right.
For example, if I am comparing preferences of NY City residents for taking a walk or riding a bike, then consideration of each step is unnecessary. If I then look at whether those who walk try to avoid pavers with grates in them, I can’t just say they’re taking “a walk”, which was an action, but not “taking steps”, so they will simply blindly head toward their destination with little or no regard for their route.
As for your questions on time, Time and Praxeology from Human Action may fit what you’re looking for.
cporter
Mereology is wonderful.