Rothbard against Mises & Hayek 's relativism

[pierreyves]

Pour ceux qui sont intéressés par le sujet, je recommande très très chaudement cette conférence de Roberta Modugno:

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xatrg2_mu…-hayek-and_news

In brief:

Rothbard was in favor of absolute values and natural laws, based on rational thinking.

Hayek misses the importance of natural laws for liberty

Mises utilitarian relativist approach to ethics is not enough to make a full case for liberty

This leads to different ways of theoretically founding a free society

. Evolutionary & value free foundation of a free society

. Rational foundation of liberty

[Régis S.]

Très intéressant. Merci, Pierre-Yves.

Si tu connais – ou d'autres participants – des articles où Rothbard reprochent à Hayek d'ignorer la doctrine de la loi naturelle, je suis preneur.

[pierreyves]

Très intéressant. Merci, Pierre-Yves.

Si tu connais – ou d'autres participants – des articles où Rothbard reprochent à Hayek d'ignorer la doctrine de la loi naturelle, je suis preneur.

Oui, si quelqu'un a je suis preneur aussi (je n'ai pas ça en stock).

Voici un complémentaire texte de Rothbard à propos de Mises:

http://mises.org/story/2968

Having said this, and never being able to express how much of an enormous intellectual debt I owe to Mises, I must record two important defects in the paper, which stem from what I consider basic weaknesses in the Mises worldview. One is Mises's attempt to deny anyone the use of the concept "irrational." Mises categorically denies that anyone can ever act irrationally, either in the means he undertakes or in the ends for which he strives.

[…]

This, Mises's ethical relativism, is his second great defect in this paper, and we have seen how it is intimately tied up with the first. As a result, Mises, excellent when he criticizes governments for opposing economics because economic science shows that governments cannot accomplish their objectives, falters when he tried to refute the ethical contentions of the statists.

[xara]

Très intéressant. Merci, Pierre-Yves.

Si tu connais – ou d'autres participants – des articles où Rothbard reprochent à Hayek d'ignorer la doctrine de la loi naturelle, je suis preneur.

Dans l'Ethique de la liberté, il y a aussi une sous section consacrée à Mises dans la partie critiquant l'utilitarisme comme base d'une défense du libéralisme: http://mises.org/rothbard/ethics/twentysix.asp

[pierreyves]

Dans l'Ethique de la liberté, il y a aussi une sous section consacrée à Mises dans la partie critiquant l'utilitarisme comme base d'une défense du libéralisme: http://mises.org/rothbard/ethics/twentysix.asp

J'avais complètement oublié cet excellent passage, Merci.

Ce passage est un délice

Furthermore, the existence in the society of just one militant anarchist, whose psychic grievance against government is such that he cannot be compensated for his psychic disutility from the existence or activity of government, is enough by itself to destroy the Compensation Principle case for any government action whatsoever. And surely at least one such anarchist exists.

Et le passage à propos de Mises qui dans l'élan de son refus d'émettre des jugements de valeur … renie justement le fait qu'il ne connaît pas les jugements de valeurs de chacun, d'aujourd'hui comme de demain est vraiment sympa (au passage, on voit combien l'épistémologie kantienne est un labyrinthe, même pour qq de la trempe de Mises).

En souvenir de la réaction de Mises à la MPS:

But, as a utilitarian, Mises’s system is a curiously bloodless one; even as a valuing laissez-faire liberal, he is only willing to make the one value judgment that he joins the majority of the people in favoring their common peace, prosperity, and abundance. In this way as an opponent of objective ethics, and uncomfortable as he must be with making any value judgments even as a citizen, he makes the minimal possible degree of such judgments. True to his utilitarian position, his value judgment is the desirability of fulfilling the subjectively desired goals of the bulk of the populace.

Mises socialiste !

Thus, while praxeological economic theory is extremely useful for providing data and knowledge for framing economic policy, it cannot be sufficient by itself to enable the economist to make any value pronouncements or to advocate any public policy whatsoever. More specifically, Ludwig von Mises to the contrary notwithstanding, neither praxeological economics nor Mises’s utilitarian liberalism is sufficient to make the case for laissez faire and the free-market economy. To make such a case, one must go beyond economics and utilitarianism to establish an objective ethics which affirms the overriding value of liberty, and morally condemns all forms of statism, from egalitarianism to “the murder of redheads,” as well as such goals as the lust for power and the satisfaction of envy. To make the full case for liberty, one cannot be a methodological slave to every goal that the majority of the public might happen to cherish.

Très bien dit, et sans les biais randroïdes.

Passionnant.