Tuesday, August 12, 2008
Human Action
The methodology of Austrolibertarians is praxeology. Praxeology is the science of human action. Praxeology builds upon the a priori fundamental axiom that human beings act. In essence, individuals engage is conscious actions towards chosen goals. One can deduce the logical implications from the fact that individuals act. While valuation and judgement is in the minds of the individual, it is only apparent when acted upon.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
2 comments:
When I read the term "Praxeology" and read that it has been characterized as a science, I began to do some research on the term "science." If you agree with this definition, that science is "intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behavior of the physical and natural world through observation and experiment" then Praxeology is anything but scientific. Ludwig von Mises, an Austrian economist and philosopher who has had a major influence on contemporary libertarianism and populizer of Praxeology "rejected the use of observation, saying that human actors are too complex to be reduced to their component parts and too self-conscious not to have their behavior affected by the very act of observation."
Also, I don’t think I’m going out on a limb by characterizing Mises theory as deterministic even though Paul who subscribes to the theory has indicated that humans have "free will," which in and of itself is a specious line of argumentation. It places humans as merely responding to stimuli. Additionally, Mises reduces human actions to a simple cognitive process where a person increases his/her satisfaction by removing a source of dissatisfaction. Not only does this formulation take from an ahistorical form of naturalism, but it also misleads folks. Humans, are above all else, social beings who have developed our productive forces to the degree that everyone in the world can be adequately fed, clothed, housed if workers won political power to organize universal access to health care, education, the arts, etc. This taking place after workers councils transitioned away from a market-based economic system as the institution of private property (i.e., private control over natural resources, factories, offices, transportation, and intellectual property such as genes and formulas to medication) is abolished. However, one needs an historical materialist conception of the world to see this potential.
I will agree with you here, to a certain extent. When I began studying the austrolibertarian methodology of praxeology, I had the same reservations about the term being a "science". In contemporary usage of the term "science", praxeology does not fit the definition of observation and experiment (empiricism/positivism). Praxeology does not require those methods, but utilizes deductive logic. However, taking a look at the etymology and etiology of the term "praxeology", it fits the definition of science as "knowledge of any kind" (New Oxford American Dictionary), specifically knowledge of human action.
Mises theory is by no means deterministic, he is actually the antithesis (for lack of a better term) of determinism. Determinism posits that all events, including human action, are ultimately determined by causes external to the will. However, Mises emphasis "free will" in the form of "rational" choice, as opposed to just a plain reaction. This is rational in the sense that a person thinks and has volition, not that the choice is rational in itself, per se. Furthermore, in much of his writings, he sees the future as uncertain, which is not deterministic. Hence, Mises was not deterministic.
In regards to satisfaction and human action, while the formulation of choice is worthy of debate, choice and volition is only apparent when humans act.
Jerald: Humans, are above all else, social beings who have developed our productive forces to the degree that everyone in the world can be adequately fed, clothed, housed if workers won political power to organize universal access to health care, education, the arts, etc.
This appears to diverge from the topic of methodology, and would best be discussed under another post.
Jerald: However, one needs an historical materialist conception of the world to see this potential.
I am curious how you, and/or Marx and his cohorts would define and describe historical materialism as a methodology. From the post "Philosphers have merely interpreted the world...", it is difficult to gather a definition of historical materialism as a methodology and/or philosophy. The post sites examples of historical materialism at work, and also attempts to counter "idealism", but does not outright define historical materialism.
Post a Comment