All human action is necessarily rational. Yes or No
It is like talking to a homeopath.
my lord this must be why I feel like I am playing chess with a pigeon.
I must apologize, but I have no idea of what you are talking about... Are you implying that praxeology is not part of the Austrian School?
It is like talking to a homeopath.
my lord this must be why I feel like I am playing chess with a pigeon.
I must apologize, but I have no idea of what you are talking about... Are you implying that praxeology is not part of the Austrian School?
No, I am sure praxeology is part of that totally debunked mystical school of dips-hits, storytellers and data deniers.
I was asking if you were one of them.
_________________
?We must not look at goblin men,
We must not buy their fruits:
Who knows upon what soil they fed
Their hungry thirsty roots??
http://jakobvirgil.blogspot.com/
It is like talking to a homeopath.
my lord this must be why I feel like I am playing chess with a pigeon.
I must apologize, but I have no idea of what you are talking about... Are you implying that praxeology is not part of the Austrian School?
No, I am sure praxeology is part of that totally debunked mystical school of dips-hits, storytellers and data deniers.
I was asking if you were one of them.
Oh. You might want to go easy on the smilies, then. They - combined with your homeopathy, chess and pigeon comments (?) - made your post quite confusing...
I am not, by the way, an Austrian School Economist.
It is like talking to a homeopath.
my lord this must be why I feel like I am playing chess with a pigeon.
I must apologize, but I have no idea of what you are talking about... Are you implying that praxeology is not part of the Austrian School?
No, I am sure praxeology is part of that totally debunked mystical school of dips-hits, storytellers and data deniers.
I was asking if you were one of them.
What data do Austrians ignore?
With your definition, I'd be tempted to say yes. Mostly because if you view action as goal oriented, and goals as end desires in themselves or paths towards terminal ends, then any action leading towards that end would per your definition be rational.
However, as I've said in discussions before, defining a term in a generally not accepted or simplified way creates problems in terms of the validity of the argument. Let's say you have a person with schizophrenia, who believes that by not eating he'll become stronger, then his actions are rational in accordance with your definition, but not in terms of what can be established as objective fact.
Of course, I'm not exactly sure what you're trying to argue, that rational action is separated from reality, by your definition, it would be possible to argue that if one desires 72 virgins, then it would be perfectly rational to become a martyr for instance.
However, as I've said in discussions before, defining a term in a generally not accepted or simplified way creates problems in terms of the validity of the argument. Let's say you have a person with schizophrenia, who believes that by not eating he'll become stronger, then his actions are rational in accordance with your definition, but not in terms of what can be established as objective fact.
Of course, I'm not exactly sure what you're trying to argue, that rational action is separated from reality, by your definition, it would be possible to argue that if one desires 72 virgins, then it would be perfectly rational to become a martyr for instance.
*Oh, wait - there is someone at the door. *Who is it?* *Allāhu Akbar!* *BOOOM*
It is like talking to a homeopath.
my lord this must be why I feel like I am playing chess with a pigeon.
I must apologize, but I have no idea of what you are talking about... Are you implying that praxeology is not part of the Austrian School?
No, I am sure praxeology is part of that totally debunked mystical school of dips-hits, storytellers and data deniers.
I was asking if you were one of them.
Oh. You might want to go easy on the smilies, then. They - combined with your homeopathy, (1)chess and pigeon comments (?) - made your post quite confusing...
I am not, by the way, an Austrian School Economist.
Then why do you bring up their mystic woo-hoo in polite conversations?
(1)
replace creationist with the Austrian School , homeopaths, palm-readers, believers in rational choice and I think you will understand what I mean.
_________________
?We must not look at goblin men,
We must not buy their fruits:
Who knows upon what soil they fed
Their hungry thirsty roots??
http://jakobvirgil.blogspot.com/
So, this is just another stab at Rational Choice? How about keeping such statements in the "Anarchy" thread rather than trying to derail this thread? I speculate that the other posters in this thread have no great desire to be part of our ongoing private dispute.
It is like talking to a homeopath.
my lord this must be why I feel like I am playing chess with a pigeon.
I must apologize, but I have no idea of what you are talking about... Are you implying that praxeology is not part of the Austrian School?
No, I am sure praxeology is part of that totally debunked mystical school of dips-hits, storytellers and data deniers.
I was asking if you were one of them.
What data do Austrians ignore?
I'm guessing that he's referring to the Austrian school's reluctance to largely utilize "empirical" statistical and mathematical data as the basis for the theories.
It is like talking to a homeopath.
my lord this must be why I feel like I am playing chess with a pigeon.
I must apologize, but I have no idea of what you are talking about... Are you implying that praxeology is not part of the Austrian School?
No, I am sure praxeology is part of that totally debunked mystical school of dips-hits, storytellers and data deniers.
I was asking if you were one of them.
What data do Austrians ignore?
I'm guessing that he's referring to the Austrian school's reluctance to largely utilize "empirical" statistical and mathematical data as the basis for the theories.
I suppose so, but using axioms and deductive reasoning doesn't mean one ignores the environment around you.
It is like talking to a homeopath.
my lord this must be why I feel like I am playing chess with a pigeon.
I must apologize, but I have no idea of what you are talking about... Are you implying that praxeology is not part of the Austrian School?
No, I am sure praxeology is part of that totally debunked mystical school of dips-hits, storytellers and data deniers.
I was asking if you were one of them.
What data do Austrians ignore?
I'm guessing that he's referring to the Austrian school's reluctance to largely utilize "empirical" statistical and mathematical data as the basis for the theories.
I suppose so, but using axioms and deductive reasoning doesn't mean one ignores the environment around you.
It does not, but Jacob has a habit of using phrases like "utterly debunked" instead of saying "That I don't personally agree with".
It is like talking to a homeopath.
my lord this must be why I feel like I am playing chess with a pigeon.
I must apologize, but I have no idea of what you are talking about... Are you implying that praxeology is not part of the Austrian School?
No, I am sure praxeology is part of that totally debunked mystical school of dips-hits, storytellers and data deniers.
I was asking if you were one of them.
What data do Austrians ignore?
I'm guessing that he's referring to the Austrian school's reluctance to largely utilize "empirical" statistical and mathematical data as the basis for the theories.
I suppose so, but using axioms and deductive reasoning doesn't mean one ignores the environment around you.
It does not, but Jacob has a habit of using phrases like "utterly debunked" instead of saying "That I don't personally agree with".
I use it because it is more polite than to say utterly moronic.
_________________
?We must not look at goblin men,
We must not buy their fruits:
Who knows upon what soil they fed
Their hungry thirsty roots??
http://jakobvirgil.blogspot.com/
Last edited by JakobVirgil on 28 Sep 2012, 9:17 am, edited 1 time in total.
I've never understood the gamblers mentality, especially when the odds are heavily stacked against them and the losses are potentially huge. I'm not sure how rational an act that is, although the desire is for "satisfaction", knowing the probability of reaching it being low, it's hard to see it as being so. That also applies to any situation where the outcome is unknown, or a limited amount of data is available. I think many people lead their lives in this manner, accepting that an element of "risk" is involved in many decisions in life. I don't feel that taking an action where the probability of success is low or the outcome is largely unknown is particularly rational. I think to be truly rational is to work with as much information as you can get, to know exactly what it is you're actually doing, with a high probability of predicting the outcome. It seems to me that many people aren't actually intersted in gathering all the information they can, or wilfully ignore it. People can be deliberately irrational sometimes. I think you could only say people are always rational if they actually believe what they are doing is going to benefit them. Taking risks is moving away from the sphere of rationality into a whole new dimension of hope, luck etc.
I think that some folks are self-destructive.
_________________
?We must not look at goblin men,
We must not buy their fruits:
Who knows upon what soil they fed
Their hungry thirsty roots??
http://jakobvirgil.blogspot.com/
It is like talking to a homeopath.
my lord this must be why I feel like I am playing chess with a pigeon.
I must apologize, but I have no idea of what you are talking about... Are you implying that praxeology is not part of the Austrian School?
No, I am sure praxeology is part of that totally debunked mystical school of dips-hits, storytellers and data deniers.
I was asking if you were one of them.
What data do Austrians ignore?
I'm guessing that he's referring to the Austrian school's reluctance to largely utilize "empirical" statistical and mathematical data as the basis for the theories.
I suppose so, but using axioms and deductive reasoning doesn't mean one ignores the environment around you.
It does not, but Jacob has a habit of using phrases like "utterly debunked" instead of saying "That I don't personally agree with".
I use it because it is more polite than to say utterly moronic.
But hardly empirical.
It is like talking to a homeopath.
my lord this must be why I feel like I am playing chess with a pigeon.
I must apologize, but I have no idea of what you are talking about... Are you implying that praxeology is not part of the Austrian School?
No, I am sure praxeology is part of that totally debunked mystical school of dips-hits, storytellers and data deniers.
I was asking if you were one of them.
What data do Austrians ignore?
I'm guessing that he's referring to the Austrian school's reluctance to largely utilize "empirical" statistical and mathematical data as the basis for the theories.
I suppose so, but using axioms and deductive reasoning doesn't mean one ignores the environment around you.
It does not, but Jacob has a habit of using phrases like "utterly debunked" instead of saying "That I don't personally agree with".
I use it because it is more polite than to say utterly moronic.
But hardly empirical.
Yes, Exactly people who reject evidence are hardly empirical and hardily mornic.
In this crowd are Homeopaths, Creationists and folks that give creedance to Austrian School economists.
_________________
?We must not look at goblin men,
We must not buy their fruits:
Who knows upon what soil they fed
Their hungry thirsty roots??
http://jakobvirgil.blogspot.com/
