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

MISES AND LACHMANN ON HUMAN ACTIONmethod for economics, it may initially appear puzzling that he also,like Lachmann, indicates the significance of meaning for the socialsciences: ‘What makes natural science possible is the power toexperiment; what makes social science possible is the power to graspor to comprehend the meaning of human action’ (ibid.: 9).However, by ‘comprehending the meaning of action’ ineconomics, Mises does not refer to the Weberian notion ofunderstanding meaning. Mises distinguishes the comprehension ofmeaning into two kinds: conceiving the meaning of an action, whichis the concern of economics; and understanding the meaning ofaction, which is the concern of history. The distinction betweenconceiving meaning and understanding meaning is both importantyet not immediately obvious. According to Mises:We conceive the meaning of action, that is to say, we take anaction to be such. We see in the action the endeavour to reacha goal by the use of means. In conceiving the meaning of anaction we consider it as a purposeful endeavour to reach somegoal, but we do not regard the quality of the ends proposedand the means applied. We conceive activity as such, its logical(praxeological) qualities and categories.(Mises 1990:9, emphasis added)This statement is amenable to a number of interpretations. First,Mises could be arguing that we require certain a priori concepts inorder to identify anything as human action, where human action isnecessarily means/ends orientated. Second, Mises could be arguingthat we must be in possession of concepts applicable to types ofaction, in order to comprehend any individual instances, or tokens,of any type of action. For example, we must be in possession of theconcept of ‘means’ in order to comprehend any specific action as‘means/ends orientated’. Third, Mises could be arguing that everyaction can only be comprehended if we can apply the whole range ofpraxeological concepts to each action. Unfortunately, each of theseinterpretations receives textual support from Mises’s own writings.To appreciate some of the ambiguities in Mises’s position, takethe following argument:Economics therefore is not based on or derived (abstracted)from experience. It is a deductive system, starting from theinsight into the principles of human reason and conduct. As amatter of fact all our experience in the field of human action is35