# Austrian Critique Of Empiricism

**URL:** <https://forum.lpsf.org/t/austrian-critique-of-empiricism/4209>\
**Category:** Discussion\
**Created:** [August 8, 2005, 11:13pm UTC](https://forum.lpsf.org/t/austrian-critique-of-empiricism/4209 "2005-08-08T23:13:13Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 4\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![dredelstein](https://forum.lpsf.org/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/d/cab0a1/32.png) [@dredelstein](https://forum.lpsf.org/u/dredelstein)\
**Post date:** [August 8, 2005, 11:13pm UTC](https://forum.lpsf.org/t/austrian-critique-of-empiricism/4209/1 "2005-08-08T23:13:13Z")

</div>

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](http://www.mises.org/esandtam/pes2.asp)

Best, Michael

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![stevedekorte](https://forum.lpsf.org/user_avatar/forum.lpsf.org/stevedekorte/32/9_2.png) [@stevedekorte](https://forum.lpsf.org/u/stevedekorte)\
**Post date:** [August 9, 2005, 1:47am UTC](https://forum.lpsf.org/t/austrian-critique-of-empiricism/4209/2 "2005-08-09T01:47:57Z")

</div>

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

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![dredelstein](https://forum.lpsf.org/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/d/cab0a1/32.png) [@dredelstein](https://forum.lpsf.org/u/dredelstein)\
**Post date:** [August 12, 2005, 6:30pm UTC](https://forum.lpsf.org/t/austrian-critique-of-empiricism/4209/3 "2005-08-12T18:30:51Z")

</div>

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

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![stevedekorte](https://forum.lpsf.org/user_avatar/forum.lpsf.org/stevedekorte/32/9_2.png) [@stevedekorte](https://forum.lpsf.org/u/stevedekorte)\
**Post date:** [August 13, 2005, 12:03am UTC](https://forum.lpsf.org/t/austrian-critique-of-empiricism/4209/4 "2005-08-13T00:03:14Z")

</div>

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