Today I left a comment over at SOLOHQ on Heidi Morris’s article “Reason and Reality: The Logical Compatibility of Austrian Economics and Objectivism,” disagreeing with what I take to be mistaken views of Austrian economics by a couple of the other commentors. The article is interesting, and admirable in its attempt to bridge the divide between the two schools of thought on both philosophical and economic issues, but it is also a little superficial in its treatment. For instance, one of the major hurdles to such a reconciliation is the subject of apriorism. Rand explicitly rejected apriorism (or at least Kantian apriorism). It remains to be shown how (or even if) praxeology-as-an-a priori-discipline can be compatible with Objectivism. (I think it can be, although it may require a little reformulation.) I recently began work on an essay dealing with this very problem. I plan to submit it to JARS when it is finished. Keep an eye out for future posts linking to rough drafts.
Geoffrey is an Aristotelian-Liberal political philosopher and an adjunct instructor for Buena Vista University. His work has appeared in the Journal of Libertarian Studies, the Journal of Value Inquiry, and Transformers and Philosophy. He lives in Edgewood, KY with his wife and two children.
Related posts:
- Barry Smith, Austrian economics, and the irrefutability of the action axiom
- Value-neutrality in science; and Rand's agent-relative theory of value and the Austrian theory of subjective value
- Ayn Rand and Apriorism
- Update
- JARS!!!
Political Science PhD
Comments on this entry are closed.