tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2473166537823294555.post5402923353530620605..comments2023-11-02T06:04:23.552-04:00Comments on Back to the Drawing Board: Some Thoughts on the Limits of Austrian AnalysisDannyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14933199894935324897noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2473166537823294555.post-11889072624506928682009-03-08T12:40:00.000-04:002009-03-08T12:40:00.000-04:00Hi there; thanks for checking out my site! I'm no...Hi there; thanks for checking out my site! I'm not sure if both anonymous comments were left by the same person, but I'll assume that they were in responding.<BR/><BR/>I agree that Austrian economics need not be confined to use in praxeological reasoning, but I'd suggest that in applying praxeological ideas to the real world, we move into what Mises categorized as "history." That is, we develop a priori conceptual tools to help us to think about historical events. But my point here was just that for all the talk about analytical a priori reasoning, the jump from theory to history will necessarily introduce a lot of uncertainty as non-actions are introduced to the mix and as we are confronted by difficulties in identifying exactly what choices people made in particular instances. None of that is meant to suggest that Austrian economics is useless or false; I only hoped to show why it might be more limited in explanatory power than some people seem to think.Dannyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14933199894935324897noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2473166537823294555.post-57852269538496369312009-03-08T12:08:00.000-04:002009-03-08T12:08:00.000-04:00but yeah, if there ain't no action then AE don't a...but yeah, if there ain't no action then AE don't apply, and it is not clear cut when we can interpret something as an action or as e.g. a reflex. Still, that leaves an awful lot of stuff for AE to be applied toAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2473166537823294555.post-83962424093346097172009-03-08T12:02:00.000-04:002009-03-08T12:02:00.000-04:00but praxeology is only one aspect of doing economi...but praxeology is only one aspect of doing economics: it is in the application, seeing when, where and how the pure theory applies, and then supplementing it with empirical information, that AE gets its true beefAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2473166537823294555.post-71631533275333088272008-12-22T23:10:00.000-05:002008-12-22T23:10:00.000-05:00Well but I didn't say anything about refuting Aust...Well but I didn't say anything about refuting Austrian economics. My point was that if "reactions" are very common, then our ability to use Austrian analyses to understand observed phenomena may be limited.Dannyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14933199894935324897noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2473166537823294555.post-57183443402544236662008-12-22T22:59:00.000-05:002008-12-22T22:59:00.000-05:00Unless I miss something in your analysis, wouldn't...Unless I miss something in your analysis, wouldn't all of these non purposive behaviors simply be under 'reactions'. Properly speaking they are conditions of the actor and may be as different as any material, empirical circumstance does. The fact that one automatically flinches from pain is no more contrary to Austrian economics than the flammability of kerosene. These material facts are only datum for the actor. One's body is ultimately nothing but a means toward satisfaction.RJ Moore IIhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07084447514430522076noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2473166537823294555.post-27668294885754281342008-12-14T14:43:00.000-05:002008-12-14T14:43:00.000-05:00Thanks for the recommendation, Jordan! From the b...Thanks for the recommendation, Jordan! From the brief description on Beinhocker's Wikipedia page, it sounds like he's basically reintroducing us to Hayek and Kirzner (or alternatively, building on Schumpeter). Are you familiar with their work? Is Beinhocker's paradigm substantially distinct?Dannyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14933199894935324897noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2473166537823294555.post-42731601373837340672008-12-14T14:22:00.000-05:002008-12-14T14:22:00.000-05:00For a great look at economics that does not assume...For a great look at economics that does not assume perfect deductive rationality, look at Eric D Beinhocker's "The Origin of Wealth". I'm working my way though it right now, and it does a great job of showing how markets can emerge without from evolving individuals using inductive rules. The first casualty of this process? Equilibrium. I would definitely recommend it.Jordan Amdahlhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10190947260682680443noreply@blogger.com