I admire Hayek for other reasons. (Two of them to be exact)
Posted on 08/04/2009 1:45:12 PM PDT by parsifal
Mainstream economists dismiss the Austrians as cranks. Nobel economist Paul Samuelson wrote that "I tremble for the reputation of my subject" after reading the "exaggerated claims that used to be made in economics for the power of deduction and a priori reasoning [the Austrian methods]." (1) Noted economist Mark Blaug has called Austrian methodologies "so cranky and idiosyncratic that we can only wonder that they have been taken seriously by anyone Perhaps the defining difference between mainstream and Austrian economists lies in their opposing philosophies towards learning truth.
Mainstream scientists use a well-developed process called the scientific method. This method employs both data and theory. "Data" includes facts, evidence and statistics. "Theory" is the attempt to describe general laws, principles and causes and effects found in the data. Both form a cycle, as data goes into the formulation of theory, whose conclusions then engender more data collection in an attempt to confirm, refute or develop yet more theories. The accuracy of this process is verified by experimentation or prediction. Scientists believe they are on the right path when both theory and data agree; when they disagree, they know something is wrong. It could be the theory is wrong, or the data is badly collected or interpreted.
(Excerpt) Read more at huppi.com ...
I will say that my admiration of Hayek is based on his political work, not his economic. I of course read his “Serfdom” way back, but I mainly liked “Constitution of Liberty” which I read a couple of times. In scanning through it the other day, it occurred to me it might be about time to read through it again.
I admire Hayek for other reasons. (Two of them to be exact)
Thanks, I’m not familiar with him, but I’ll look for him.
Austrian Economics is a cult.
What’s wrong with Rockwell? I could probably do hundreds of hours of research but I’m busy with other stuff too. Tell me more.
Thank you for that, and God bless you sir.
Here’s one good link:
Why I Am Not an Austrian Economist
by
Bryan Caplan
Assistant Professor
Department of Economics
George Mason University
http://economics.gmu.edu/bcaplan/whyaust.htm
parsy.
Different wavelength, maybe.
He is a libertarian, which is good. Anti-war which I disagree with. Anti-Lincoln, which again I disagree with.
But he likes Von Mises, which means he can’t be all bad.
I read Serfdom a few years ago. Apparently, Hayek is not as far out there as the rest. He actually won 1/2 a Nobel.
parsy.
The use of “no” data and the “gold standard” surprised me.
thx for the link. noted.
Likewise. I think you need a qualitative slant on things, too, but how do you work without quantitative tools. This is like Aristotle jamming up European science for years.
parsy.
There’s another Caplan article there, but I can’t get it to link. It comes up if you go to that “thereisnoschool” site link way above.
parsy.
When China says “we’re done with dollars and we’re using copper as the only currency we accept”, how excited will you be to be holding trillion dollar notes?
China has an end game they’re working. It involves getting rid of their dollars.
Fiat currencies are always inflated, that is as much an economic law as supply and demand.
Will have to at home later. No speakers on computer at office.
parsy.
Don’t think the gold standard will work anymore.
parsy.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.