|Argive99 is correct. I am an academician and many of my colleagues tell me that I have too much time on my hands! :) Really I do have job. I teach 4 courses a semester (3 at the graduate level), have several committees, play basketball 3 times a week, play tennis 3 or 4 times a week weather permitting, work out regularly (nautilus, running, stairmaster, elliptical machine, etc.). And of course, I read and write.|
Where did this Austrian-Objectivist project come from some of you have been wondering? It happened this way. After I finished writing my book, Capitalism and Commerce, I came to the realization that virtually all of what I had to say in it fit within Austrian economics, Objectivism, and oftentimes both areas. I began to read widely in Austrian economics. I already had a fairly good understanding of Objectivism. The more I read, the more I realized that the "schools" had much in common if one looked in the right places.
Menger was Aristotelian and had a lot in common with Rand. Mises was off base with his Kantian epistemology, but his excellent deductive use of the action axiom, as shown by Rothbard, could be derived using induction and a natural law approach.
In several essays I have shown how Austrian praxeology's emphasis on subjective value and value freedom are compatible with objective value and value relevance.
Praxeological economics and Objectivism are complementary and compatible disciplines.When used together to explain reality the case for a free society is strengthened!
Both Matt and Makemore understand what I am trying to do So do Aeon Skoble, Tibor Machan, Sam Bostaph, Bill Peterson, Neil Parille, Jeremy, Joe Rowlands, Andre Zantonovitch, and Ricardo Crespo. Or, at least it appears that they do from their postings to my essays!. I have some fellow travelers in this project including Larry Sechrest (who I found out was on top of the project before I had a clue of what Austrian economics really was!), Chris Sciabarra, Stephen Kinsella, Richard C.B. Johnsson, and a few others.