What Is A Priori Science, and Why Does Economics Qualify As One?
There is nothing magical or mysterious about the a priori foundations of economics, writes Gene Callahan.
There is nothing magical or mysterious about the a priori foundations of economics, writes Gene Callahan.
A book-length manuscript based on notes taken by Bettina B. Greaves during the Mises Seminar in New York in the 1960s.
In an essay that made his <a href="http://store.mises.org/Austrian-Perspective-on-the-History-of-Economic-Thought-2-volume-set-P273C0.aspx">masterpiece on the history of thought</a> famous, Murray Rothbard argues that Adam Smith should not be called the founder of economics, nor a theorist who improved on economic science, nor even a consistent defender of the market economy.
Throughout human history there have been those who deny free will and personal responsibility, instead blaming their wrong-doings on interventions divine and planetary.
In a dark hour of Mises's life, there was a glimmer of light: an invitation from New York University to speak about the contributions he had made to economic thought. The address was given in 1940, nine years before Human Action appeared on the scene.
In the sciences of human action, it is impossible to test conclusions. The “facts” of human history are complex ones, resultants of many causes. These causes can only be isolated by theory, theory that is necessarily a priori to these historical facts.
Praxeology rests on the fundamental axiom that individual human beings act, that is, on the primordial fact that individuals engage in conscious actions toward chosen goals.