The Austrian point here is that essential economic truths are not the
subject of empiricism, but rather are synthetic a priori truths, e.g.,
"man acts," "individuals act exclusively in ways they perceive will
make them better off," etc.
http://www.mises.org/esandtam/pes2.asp
Best, Michael
It seems to me that:
"What does this first step in our criticism of empiricism prove? It proves evidently that the empiricist idea of knowledge is wrong, and it proves this by means of a meaningful a priori argument."
is a straw man argument as empiricism (or at least the logical positivism of Ayer) does not deny the a prior - it just limits it to tautologies, of which the definition of empiricism is one (that experience is experience, and non-experience is not).
-- Steve
Steve,
You wrote:
empiricism (or at least the logical
positivism of Ayer) does not deny the a prior - it just limits it to
tautologies, of which the definition of empiricism is one (that
experience is experience, and non-experience is not).
Consider the sentence: "All sentences are either empirical or
tautological." Is this sentence empirical or tautological?
Best, Michael
It's an analytical proposition that is non-tautological. What is the point of your question? Are you confusing the a priori with all analytical propositions?
-- Steve