Suchergebnisse

Linsbichler's erudite new book is not only an invitation for Austrian economists to reconsider their Misesian methodological foundations, but more importantly an attempt to bridge the methodological gap between the Austrian School and mainstream economics. His charitable reading of Mises provides the basis for an original conventionalist interpretation of Mises' methodology, but it is most of all his anti-dogmatism, methodological openness and call for intellectual humility that stand out. --Erwin Dekker, Assistant Professor of Cultural Economics (Erasmus University Rotterdam) This book proposes new solutions to interpretational problems of Mises' methodological position. It also o­ffers a lucid and scholarly introduction to some important problems of the logic of science. Specialists and general readers alike will profit much from reading that book. --Karl Milford, Associate Professor in History of Economic Thought and Philosophy of Economics (University of Vienna) This innovative book challenges the mainstream reading of Ludwig von Mises as a contested "a priori" proponent of the Austrian School of economics. It o­ffers new insights to Mises' methodology and epistemology by interpreting his praxeology as conventionalist. In doing so the author opens novel perspectives for contextualizing Ludwig von Mises' work in the history of the Austrian School and the long term "Methodenstreit" since the 19th century. --Friedrich Stadler, Professor for History and Philosophy of Science (University of Vienna), Head and Director of the Institute Vienna Circle, President of the Austrian Ludwig Wittgenstein Society This book presents a concise introduction to the epistemology and methodology of the Austrian School of economics as defended by Ludwig von Mises. The author provides an innovative interpretation of Mises' arguments in favour of the a priori truth of praxeology, the received view of which contributed to the academic marginalization of the Austrian School. The study puts forward a unique argument that Mises - perhaps unintentionally - defends a form of conventionalism. Chapters in the book include detailed discussions of individualism, historicism, epistemological positions, and essentialism. The author goes on to discuss Mises' justifi cation of the fundamental axiom and proposes a conventionalist interpretation. By presenting praxeology as a conventionalist research programme, the author aims at reinvigorating the interaction between the Austrian School, mainstream economics, and the philosophy of science. This comprehensive reconstruction is suitable for economists interested in the history and philosophy of their discipline, as well as for philosophers of science.

Friedrich Stadler und sein Team schließen über 40 Jahre nach Präsentation der ersten beiden Bände das von Rudolf Haller initiierte Projekt einer umfassenden Werkschau Otto Neuraths (1882–1945) ab. In acht Bänden wird auf fast 5.000 Seiten das Schaffen eines Polyhistors dokumentiert und zugänglich gemacht, dessen intellektueller Spannweite man nicht einmal gerecht wird, wenn man ihn als Philosophen, Nationalökonomen, Gesellschaftstechniker und Aufklärer bezeichnet.

Cette note identifie et commente certains traits cruciaux de la philosophie de la théorie des jeux de Robert Aumann. Ce faisant, il vise à dégager et à exprimer certaines notions tacitement détenues par de nombreux théoriciens des jeux et, idéalement, à déclencher une réflexion ultérieure sur la philosophie de la théorie des jeux en général. Selon ma reconstruction de la position d'Aumann, des règles de langage sophistiquées et relativement précises – une grammaire ultra-raffinée des interactions – constituent le cœur de la théorie des jeux. Par conséquent, le cœur de la théorie des jeux est dépourvu, ou presque dépourvu, de contenu empirique. La dernière section propose une nomenclature pour discuter lucidement des relations entre les théories, les différents types de modèles et « le monde réel » et s'en sert ensuite pour expliquer et modifier légèrement les remarques de Robert Aumann sur le rôle de la vérité et de la fécondité dans la théorie des jeux.

AbstractCurrent debates between behavioural and orthodox economists indicate that the role and epistemological status of first principles is a particularly pressing problem in economics. As an alleged paragon of extreme apriorism, the methodology of Austrian economics in Mises' tradition is often dismissed as untenable in the light of modern philosophy. In particular, the defence of the so-called fundamental axiom of praxeology—"Man acts."—by means of pure intuition is almost unanimously rejected. However, in recently resurfacing debates, the extremeness of Mises' epistemological position has been called into question. Rather than directly engaging in these exegetical discussions, this paper aims to substantiate the possibility and plausibility of conventionalist defences of praxeology per se. The proposed shift includes settling for an analytic fundamental axiom and acknowledging the prima facie tenability of other research programs than praxeology. Since conventionalist praxeology is only moderately aprioristic, mainstream economists and philosophers might be more likely to engage in fruitful discussions with those Austrian scholars who elaborate pragmatic arguments for praxeology instead of invoking pure intuition.