Debating with Block would turn any rationalist off of Austrian econ. No one got it comletely right except Mises himself. Actually not even him, but he was usually extremely rational and rigorous in his approach—more than any other economist I know of—albeit often poorly communicated.
In any case, any non-ideologically motivated rationalist worth their salt ought to be able to piece together a decent understanding of the epistemological issues by reading the first 200 pages of Human Action.
No one got it comletely right except Mises himself. Actually not even him
Um… and you—alone among the ignorant masses—realize and know all this because...? Sorry, but I don’t have a high prior on your authority in the discipline.
Actually not even him, but he was usually extremely rational and rigorous in his approach—more than any other economist I know of—albeit often poorly communicated.
Interestingly, this is pretty much what I used to say about Marx when I was a Marxist.
My point was to indicate that not all people who put stock in the “Austrian school” accept post-Misesians as competent intepreters. I meant, essentially: Mises had it right, but read his original work (not later Austrians) and you’ll be able to tell whether I’m right.
Debating with Block would turn any rationalist off of Austrian econ. No one got it comletely right except Mises himself. Actually not even him, but he was usually extremely rational and rigorous in his approach—more than any other economist I know of—albeit often poorly communicated.
In any case, any non-ideologically motivated rationalist worth their salt ought to be able to piece together a decent understanding of the epistemological issues by reading the first 200 pages of Human Action.
Um… and you—alone among the ignorant masses—realize and know all this because...? Sorry, but I don’t have a high prior on your authority in the discipline.
I would have prefaced that with “in my opinion,” but I thought that was obvious. (What else would it be?)
Interestingly, this is pretty much what I used to say about Marx when I was a Marxist.
My point was to indicate that not all people who put stock in the “Austrian school” accept post-Misesians as competent intepreters. I meant, essentially: Mises had it right, but read his original work (not later Austrians) and you’ll be able to tell whether I’m right.
Is your nick from those times? Or a memory of them?
Slightly. Of course, the word has been used by many.