I'm just curious at to what are the main differences between GMU (Boettke, Lavoie etc.) and those at the LvMI. As I understand it the former seem to advocate hermeneutics in economics and claim that one interpretation of Mises himself suggests that.
What are some good sources on this? As I understand it Huelsmann covers some of it in his book concerning Mises and Rothbard, Hoppe, Long, Gordon and others have written concerning the issue. Can anybody else recommend any good sources from either side?
"You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows"
Bob Dylan
Also, as far as I can tell Boettke believes that Austrians should try to get their work published in, and accepted by, mainstream journals.
Check out Selgin's Praxeology and Understanding. If they adhere to Lachmann's view, he addresses their arguments there. There's also Kirzner's more Hayekian branch of the Austrian school, represented at NYU, but it's pretty close to the Misesian view in the end.
To darkness I condemn you...
Jon Irenicus: Check out Selgin's Praxeology and Understanding. If they adhere to Lachmann's view, he addresses their arguments there. There's also Kirzner's more Hayekian branch of the Austrian school, represented at NYU, but it's pretty close to the Misesian view in the end.
Kirzner's views mainly differ in regard to entrepreneurship in that he views it as a discovery process, whereas Mises doesn't. That's the only main difference isn't it?
Yeah, it's the only significant one I can think of, and also Kirzner sides with Mises on monopoly I think, instead of Rothbard. The differences can be counted on a hand. Those influenced by him also believe that developing an adequate theory of entrepreneurship will dislodge Lachmann's and Shackle's claims regarding the "kaleidic" nature of the future (though Selgin considers this as incapable of resolving the dispute, as it still operates in the context of the reality of social/agent causation.)
The Kochtopus vs. Murray N. Rothbard, by David Gordon
A Fairy Tale of the Austrian Movement, by Joe Salerno (See Boettke's response)
Peter Boettke's blog is excellent (also read the comments section). Here's some good posts:
Thinking Seriously About Progress in Science (See Salerno's response)
10 Austrian Vices and How to Avoid Them
Should the Label Be Abandoned?
LibertarianAnarchy.com - Government is immoral, unnecessary, and doesn't work!
Jon Irenicus: Yeah, it's the only significant one I can think of, and also Kirzner sides with Mises on monopoly I think, instead of Rothbard.
Yeah, it's the only significant one I can think of, and also Kirzner sides with Mises on monopoly I think, instead of Rothbard.
Sorry for reviving an old thread, but this struck me as interesting. Is it possble to briefly explain how Mises and Rothbard differ on monopoly? (i.e. Without further disrupting my current book reading list!)
Anyway, main point--I found this thread looking for info about GMU. Coincidentally I'm actually within commuting distance of GMU, it's my nearest college. Am I being foolish for not immediately jumping (although I've thought on it a bit) at the opportunity to try and attend without even having to relocate or quit my job to do so? I know it depends on personal goals, but in other words, is it worth it if you're considering a possible career change in the future?
Peter Boettke seems like an asshole.
“Elections are Futures Markets in Stolen Property.” - H. L. Mencken
zefreak: Peter Boettke seems like an asshole.
I'm not sure they are assholes, but it is definitely misplaced arrogance. Others from GMU seem to have the uppity attitude.
If you find something evil that wobbles, push it. - Gary North
liberty student: zefreak: Peter Boettke seems like an asshole. I'm not sure they are assholes, but it is definitely misplaced arrogance. Others from GMU seem to have the uppity attitude.
I wouldn't go so far as to say that any of them of assholes, a lot of them can come across as arrogant, but I daresay a lot of the LvMI fellows may also come across as arrogant. A lot of them, especially Professor Boettke come across as very elitist, now, once you understand their views on Austrian economics and how it is to progress, a lot of it is understandable, and even agreeable.
GilesStratton:I wouldn't go so far as to say that any of them of assholes, a lot of them can come across as arrogant, but I daresay a lot of the LvMI fellows may also come across as arrogant.
No, they don't. Not that way.
GilesStratton:A lot of them, especially Professor Boettke come across as very elitist, now, once you understand their views on Austrian economics and how it is to progress, a lot of it is understandable, and even agreeable.
Their views on how it is to progress are anachronistic. No one cares what ivory tower intellectuals think. AE has been taken to the street by people like Paul, Woods, Schiff and Rogers. They're trying to lead a top down revolution when people are already on the march, pitchforks in hand.
It's kinda cute, like people dressing up in medieval clothes and having mock swordfights.
liberty student: Their views on how it is to progress are anachronistic. No one cares what ivory tower intellectuals think. AE has been taken to the street by people like Paul, Woods, Schiff and Rogers. They're trying to lead a top down revolution when people are already on the march, pitchforks in hand. It's kinda cute, like people dressing up in medieval clothes and having mock swordfights.
If it is economic science you want to advance, people like Peter Boettke have the right idea (with some qualifications as pointed out by Murphy, Horwitz etc.). On the other hand, if it is libertarianism you want to advance people like LS, Stranger and Ron Paul have the right idea.
This summarizes Boettke's views for me, and puts things nicely in perspective:
Peter Boettke:Let me be clear, I am still enthusiastic about the vision that inspired me to be an economist: Austrian economics, radical libertarianism, and revisionist history. This vision is fundamentally Rothbardian, and my entire career has been spent attempting to figure out how to advance that vision in an academic world that is hostile on almost every margin to that vision. Also I am still extremely competitive. I want Austrian economics to WIN, to control the AER, JPE, QJE, to teach at Harvard, Chicago, Stanford, even MIT. I cannot believe we haven't achieved that, and I refuse to put the blame on others. Because as any competitive person will tell you, if you want to get better you have to look in the mirror and take responsibility for failures on yourself. Taking that responsibility is a first step toward the improvements required.
GilesStratton:If it is economic science you want to advance, people like Peter Boettke have the right idea (with some qualifications as pointed out by Murphy, Horwitz etc.)
Ron Paul and LvMI have driven more people to study AE in college than anyone else. Boettke will be the beneficiary of their work, as some will be attracted to his post-graduate program. But let's be clear, the 18 year olds fired up to become economists are not because of the GMU crowd.
GilesStratton:On the other hand, if it is libertarianism you want to advance people like LS, Stranger and Ron Paul have the right idea.
AE is only a means to an end. Economic science is as valuable as any science if it can be incorporated into a purposeful life. I want to be free of taxation, and free to develop my wealth peacefully, by my own standard. Not necessarily spend years of my life discovering the mysteries of Scottish free banking. There are some people who get off on that, and it's cool with me, but it's not what most people want out of free markets. It's not what puts bread on the table or shoes on the feet of our kids.
The next logical step for AE and liberty, because they walk hand in hand, is to take it to the people. That means markets not publicly funded academics. AE academe will grow, but it will be driven by entrepreneurial demand and interest, not the other way around.
liberty student:Ron Paul and LvMI have driven more people to study AE in college than anyone else. Boettke will be the beneficiary of their work, as some will be attracted to his post-graduate program. But let's be clear, the 18 year olds fired up to become economists are not because of the GMU crowd.
Perhaps Ron Paul attracted a lot of people to Austrianism, I won't deny that. On the other hand, I'd also venture a guess that many of the people RP "converted" (so to speak) couldn't tell you what Mises' regression theorem is, to give an entirely arbitrary number, I'd say 90%. Ron Paul was great for libertarianism, I wouldn't consider his contribution to economic science to be as great.
The LvMI has done great work attracting people to Austrian economics, I don't think any would or could (Peter Boettke most certainly does not) deny this. At the same time I think it's unfair to say that Boettke will be the "beneficiary" of this. Granted, he does benefit from Austrians choosing to study economics at a graduate level over at GMU, but at the same time many young Austrians benefit from having the option available. I know that I will be far more likely to do graduate education in economics if I know that I can do it under one of the Austrians in Europe.
liberty student: AE is only a means to an end. Economic science is as valuable as any science if it can be incorporated into a purposeful life. I want to be free of taxation, and free to develop my wealth peacefully, by my own standard. Not necessarily spend years of my life discovering the mysteries of Scottish free banking. There are some people who get off on that, and it's cool with me, but it's not what most people want out of free markets. It's not what puts bread on the table or shoes on the feet of our kids.
Says who? I know I most certainly value economics in and of itself, to begin with your post assumes that economics tells us that free markets are best, which it needn't do. I'm sorry you don't find free banking in Scotland, the ABCT, the dehomogenization of Mises and Hayek etc. to be interesting, but certainly, a great number of people do.
liberty student:The next logical step for AE and liberty, because they walk hand in hand, is to take it to the people.
Stop conflating liberty and Austrian economics. You're correct in your strategy wrt libertarianism, academics just won't do it. If what you're looking to do is to push libertarianism you'd best start finding the most convincing, not necessarily true, arguments and people who can present them well to the public. On the other hand, if you're looking to advance economic science in the Austrian tradition, you'd best be willing to address your fellow scientists.
Ludwig von Mises Institute | 518 West Magnolia Avenue | Auburn, Alabama 36832-4528
Phone: 334.321.2100 · Fax: 334.321.2119
contact@Mises.org | webmaster | AOL-IM MainMises
Mises.org sitemap