09.07.2015 Views

Subjectivism and Economic Analysis: Essays in memory of Ludwig ...

Subjectivism and Economic Analysis: Essays in memory of Ludwig ...

Subjectivism and Economic Analysis: Essays in memory of Ludwig ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

STEPHEN D.PARSONS<strong>in</strong>terpreted as an attempt to develop a more coherent underst<strong>and</strong><strong>in</strong>g<strong>of</strong> human action than that prevalent <strong>in</strong> the work <strong>of</strong> Mises. This isbecause Mises’s account is deficient both <strong>in</strong> terms <strong>of</strong> hisunderst<strong>and</strong><strong>in</strong>g as to how human action is to be <strong>in</strong>vestigated <strong>and</strong> <strong>in</strong>his underst<strong>and</strong><strong>in</strong>g as to what human action consists <strong>of</strong>. In fact, thesetwo problems are <strong>in</strong>terrelated: it is precisely because <strong>of</strong> hismethodological approach that Mises encounters problems <strong>in</strong>expla<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g human action. Lachmann’s theory can thus beunderstood as a criticism <strong>of</strong> <strong>and</strong> an attempt to resolve difficulties <strong>in</strong>both Mises’s <strong>and</strong> rational choice theories <strong>of</strong> human action. Thesetheories can be classified together <strong>in</strong> this respect because Lachmannis implicitly draw<strong>in</strong>g attention to a problem they both share:expla<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g future <strong>in</strong>tentions.Mises <strong>and</strong> Lachmann on history <strong>and</strong> economicsInitially, it seems quite clear that Mises <strong>and</strong> Lachmann are <strong>in</strong> directopposition concern<strong>in</strong>g the subject matter <strong>of</strong> economics. Misesdef<strong>in</strong>ed economics as an a priori universally valid science <strong>of</strong> humanaction:The science <strong>of</strong> human action that strives for universally validknowledge is the theoretical system whose hitherto bestelaborated branch is economics. In all its branches this scienceis a priori, not empirical…it is not derived from experience; itis prior to experience.(Mises 1981:12–13)The science <strong>of</strong> human action, or praxeology, was concerned withestablish<strong>in</strong>g certa<strong>in</strong> universal categories, which are necessary withreference to human action: ‘The cognition <strong>of</strong> praxeology isconceptual cognition. It refers to what is necessary <strong>in</strong> human action.It is a cognition <strong>of</strong> universals <strong>and</strong> categories’ (Mises 1949:51).The ‘necessity’ referred to here is meant <strong>in</strong> a dual sense: the apriori categories <strong>of</strong> human action are required both <strong>in</strong> order to act<strong>and</strong> <strong>in</strong> order to comprehend the actions <strong>of</strong> others. As praxeologywas a ‘cognition <strong>of</strong> universals’, then it could not comprehend the<strong>in</strong>dividual <strong>and</strong> unique. Because the unique could not be brought underuniversal categories, it was ‘irrational’, <strong>and</strong> thus the concern <strong>of</strong> history,not economics: ‘Individuality is given to the historian, it is exactlywhat cannot be exhaustively expla<strong>in</strong>ed or traced back to other entities.In this sense <strong>in</strong>dividuality is irrational’ (Mises 1990:12).32

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!