THE EXTRAORDINARY CLAIM OF PRAXEOLOGY
A~ST~tAeT. The author states first praxeology's dilemma: if its theoremes are a priori in the unidimensional sense in which praxeology seems to be intended, then the theory as represented in the theorem is inapplicable. If it is not a priori in that sense, then praxeology is already defeated. In a concrete analysis of a part of a praxeological system tile author shows that the contention which sees economic theory simply as the result of formal deduction starting from an a priori axiom is unfounded. As a language, praxeology is not 'water-tight'; its line of reasoning must always draw from the inarticulate background of professional knowledge. Praxeology can be explained away as a process of dialectical redefinition of concepts, ultimately and inevitably dependent upon empirical hypotheses.
Ludwig Von Mises and his disciples claim that Economics is a branch, the only developed branch to be sure, of a general science of human action which they have christened 'praxeology'. The important point, and the one which makes this claim sound extraordinary, is that they also argue the a priori character of praxeology. The general science of human action, they say, "'starts from the a priori category of action and develops out of it all that it contains .... "~ Extraordinary as this claim sounds, it has not received as far as I know a commensurate rebuttal either from economists or philosophers. Economists largely disregard altogethe r the claim rather than take the trouble to refute it; this may be in part due to the extensive use of philosophical trappings in the writings of the school, which tend to deter the non-specialist. Philosophers, on the other hand, do not feel free to criticize, since the books of the school usually begin with warnings like 'this essay is not a contribution to philosophy', z The present writer is daring enough to ignore the warnings and sufficiently concerned with the problems of economic methodology to take the trouble of rebutting.
According to Von Mises, praxeology only pays attention to problems that are of some use in the study of the real actions of men. But this does not affect the purely aprioristic character of the science and of its theorems. The fact that a particular theorem, transcendentally deduced without any help from experience, turns out to be applicable to a concrete situation is a circumstance totally external to the theorem itself. This contention gives