October 2019

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
    1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30 31    
Blog powered by Typepad

« Dan Klein on Austrian Vices | Main | New Paper on Democratic Failure »

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

This is my favorite one so far. I can't think of anything more counterproductive than to dismiss others simply because they aren't "pure" enough.

Yes, surely excellent advice. The silliest example I've seen of this is when an academic who I guess likes to think of himself as the hardest of the hardcore and the purest of the pure dismissed Ludwig Lachmann as a "former Austrian and neo-historicist-hermeneutician-nihilist." Not so much who cares, as who could even begin to imagine why he felt it necessary to write that?

Ironically--or perhaps not--today's article at Mises.org is: "Was Jean-Baptiste Say a Market Anarchist?"; posted by an econ student.

http://mises.org/story/2519

Steve-

That's just because you're a sellout! Why don't you go drool over your t-stats?

In all seriousness, though, I agree entirely, as long as I don't have to believe that indifference curves are a useful heuristic.

You don't get the point at all. That's the funny thing about discussion on the internet, nobody is eager to change their point of view.

So oh great Pearl of wisdom (could not resist that one!) - please explain the point to us all

Actually, Adam, because of the nature of the data I'm working with, I mostly do ordered logits. So I'm drooling over z-stats.

Ironically--or perhaps not--today's article at Mises.org is: "Was Jean-Baptiste Say a Market Anarchist?"; posted by an econ student.

http://mises.org/story/2519

This is not a paper. And actually I think it's pretty interesting, even if it's not helpful according to some people.

Maybe this vice stems a little from Mises' comment at the Mont Pelerin Society? Ehh? Ehhhhh?

A #12 from 10 years in the future: Doing economic history because the Austrian strain limits your ability to make any real progress in the field

There is no Austrian economics. Just good economics and bad economics.

I think Austrians must begin to accept that within the Austrian tradition there are different strains of thought, the two most important are the misesian and hayekeean strains.

It's a fact that must be accepted and this diversity is positive. The debates over "purity" are irrelevant in so far as they are based on personal quarrels and nothing good comes out of them, but discussions about different approaches within the Austrian tradition are necessary and can be very fruitful.

Remember it all started with Menger's critique of Böhm-Bawerk's Capital Theory, the greatest error ever made, he called it I think.

Amen! Reading mises.org I sometimes feel like I should feel guilty that I think Milton Friedman was a champion of liberty because 99% of what he advocated was significantly in the right direction (at minimum).

The comments to this entry are closed.

Our Books