Free Capitalist Network - Community Archive
Mises Community Archive
An online community for fans of Austrian economics and libertarianism, featuring forums, user blogs, and more.

Thought Experiment on Human Action

rated by 0 users
Answered (Not Verified) This post has 0 verified answers | 3 Replies | 1 Follower

Not Ranked
3 Posts
Points 45
curious posted on Mon, Jul 20 2009 8:38 PM

This is a thought experiment. Supposing the "buy at the lowest possible price/sell at the highest possible price" expirical premise is changed to the opposite, do we need to change any other premises in praxiology in order to make praxiology still consistent? If so, what (for example, time preference)? If not, can "Human Action" remain valid by just replacing buyer/buy with seller/sell and vice versa?

Did anyone study this kind of thought experiment?


  • | Post Points: 20

All Replies

Top 200 Contributor
478 Posts
Points 9,180

I don't understand the thought experiment.

It follows from the action axiom that humans strive to maximise their psychic income, that is, obtain the highest rank on their value scales. Reversing the statement appears to be an absurdity.

Consider the statement "two property owners agree to an exchange becuase they think they will benefit from it". Can this somehow be flipped around and still make sense?

Austrians do it a priori

Irish Liberty Forum 


  • | Post Points: 20
Not Ranked
3 Posts
Points 45

The thought experiment does not correspond to the reality. It is an intellectual exercise. The purpose is to show the praxiology methodology - logical structure of human action (another kind of human).


  • | Post Points: 20
Not Ranked
36 Posts
Points 520

In order to even contemplate the thought experiment you have to do away with praxeology entirely.  You can't just disregard one of the logical deductions from the action axiom without disproving the logical steps used to make the deduction (they're pretty straightforward, but good luck trying) or disproving the action axiom itself (which is impossible because this in itself would be an action).  That said, if this "other kind of human" desires to buy high and sell low, then they're placing a high value on receiving as little value as possible when trading.  This is contradictory.  You can't value not getting value.

Make sense?

  • | Post Points: 5
Page 1 of 1 (4 items) | RSS