Understanding Praxeology

Miscellaneous Newbies
1

I would like to get an idea, from a few examples, of how praxeological method, which is to say reasoning works - but not in terms of a philosophical discussion. Rather, I’d love to pose a few examples of regular phenomena and compare how both an and an observer would explain and analyze them. Any, and indeed all thoughts and contributions to this conceptualization would be deeply appreciated.

  1. An individual is walking down the street and sees an acorn fall. How is the praxeologically-guided thinker likely to consider the question of explaining what makes the acorn fall, vs. the non-praxeologist (inductivist)?

  2. A central bank lowers interest rates and, shortly thereafter, certain firms begin expanding rapidly and reporting record earnings? (Likely) explanation and method of investigation vs. (likely) explanation and investigation?

  3. (Dead serious:) Ghosts, supernatural events (Bermuda Triangle), etc. How would a praxeologist handle/treat/explain something suggesting knowledge beyond our own vs. a non- (or I guess ‘counter’-) praxeologist?

Thanks kindly for any guidence or responses in this regard.

SI
2

  1. Sadly, praxeology is limited in scope. Dictionary.com defines it as the study of human conduct. The acorn is not human, nor is gravity.

  2. A praxeologist will have to spend some time studying up on what the collected body of wisdom is concerning lowered interest rates. He, or his predecessors, will have analyzed deductively, from first principles, what the consequences are of a bank lowering interest rates. Just to flesh this out a bit, he might conclude that in the current state of central banking, lowered interest rates determined by the decision a central banker will lead to money being wasted on foolish grandious schemes. He may not know which schemes will be concocted in advance, but he will be on the lookout for them. When certain firms start expanding and reporting record earnings, he will, if he has the inclination and skill to do it, examine if the increased activity and profits of the companies come from a genuine demand for their products, or from a sudden increase in speculation [= foolish gambling assumptions about the industries they are part of]. In other words, are these profits based on increased production of products for which there is demand for use, or for other reasons?

The aposteriori way would be to collect data from the present all the way back to prehistory, all over the world, and see if there is any statistical correlation between low interest rates and profits in that industry. If he finds that there is, he will declare that one is the cause of the other, not knowing or caring about how one causes the other.

  1. See 1. above

BTW, the Bermuda Triangle is a myth. There are no more planes and ships lost there than anywhere else.