Professor Caldwell on Ludwig von Mises' Methodology

B He who addresses fellow men, who wants to inform and convince them, who asks questions, can proceed in this way only because he can appeal to something common to all men—namely, the logical structure of human reason. ruce CaldwelPs recent writings on the Austrian school of economics (1982, chapter 6; 1984) are undoubtedly a positive contribution to economic thought. Caldwell argues correctly that The usual criticisms of Austrian economics. .. have thus far proven unsuccessful , primarily because they proceed by assuming the validity of a rival epistemological system (e.g., positivism or falsification), then "proving" that the Austrian system does not meet the qualifications of their presumptively true system. (1982, p. 6) Or, more specifically, he says: (1) Many of the usual complaints against praxeology, so often considered to be conclusive, are anticipated and answered by Mises, and thus must be considered at this point inadequate, and (2) those that remain fail to take into account that the epistemological and methodological foundations of Austrian and neoclassical economics differ. (1982, p. 119) These arguments carry considerable force since Caldwell is an "outsider" and is well read. He is familiar with both the most significant so-called economic methodologies and the major works in the philosophy of science and social science. Thus, he is like an informed tourist who has ventured into Austrian territory and returned to tell of his journey. But his journey has not been superficial. By focusing on the fundamental and difficult works of Mises, he is able to observe the best of a consistently Austrian position.