= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
buybuydandavis comments on Contaminated by Optimism - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (74)
First, policies don't aim, actors with intent do. A journalistic peeve of mine. Newspaper writers generally spend the first 10 paragraphs of a story about legislation psycho analyzing the intent of pieces of paper, and rarely will tell you what the pieces of paper actually say.
Second, I don't consider this a serious pro free market position. It's not that no "possible" government enforced policy would do better, it's that the political process is generally unlikely to yield a better policy.
Unfortunately, many people who hold this position don't know that it's not serious.
I don't think that's an accurate characterization of Austrian economists.
Well, I think it's a quite accurate depiction of anyone who uses phrases like "a priori science."
(That is, to the extent that Austrian economics is based on a priori reasoning, various claims about types of government intervention really are claims that no possible such government intervention could ever be good for people)
A priori claims can be probabilistic claims.
Are you aware of a broad tradition of such probabilities that I'm completely unaware of?