Austrian Virtues

After two weeks of intense discussions, Pete Boettke and I would like to close the debate (for now at least) by providing a four-pager on Austrian virtues that we hope will be shared by most of those interested in the ideas of the Austrian school. The strategy to adopt to push forward Austrian ideas is in itself a discovery process. There are different views out there and each of them has strengths and weaknesses; only time will tell. Our view represents some middle-of-the road position, which we hope will succeed in the next 50 years in putting the Austrian school on every economist’s lips. This is our entrepreneurial bet.

Thanks to everyone involved. To read it, Download austrian_virtues.pdf.

Comments

[Carl Marks]

I very much appreciate the discussion that has occurred here over the past two weeks. The posts encouraged me to challenge my own view of thinking, and has made me more confident in where I stand as an aspiring economist.
These posts have encouraged me to embrace the ideas of the "Smith-Hayek" line, while also recognizing that the Austrian tradition needs to continue as a subgroup.

The world most needs Truth and Love, and I feel compelled to focus my research on that which best brings Truth to light, even if it requires me to revisit the socialist calculation debate. This discussion has challenged me to explore what truth the world is most in need of now, allowing me to better focus my studies.

I hope that this discussion does not end, as it has the potential to bear more fruit and help all of us make a positive impact on the world.

[Rafe Champion]

I don't know if Dani Rodrik thinks of himself as an Austrian or even a quasi-Austrian like Tyler Cowen but this paper, now in the Dec 2006 Journal of Economic Literature is about as Austrian as you can get without wearing lederhausen.

http://ksghome.harvard.edu/~drodrik/Lessons%20of%20the%201990s%20review%20_JEL_.pdf

Check out especially section 6 of the paper on the practical agenda for formulating growth strategies.

The kind of analysis that Rodrik practices in this paper fits like a glove with the “new political economy” that is being developed by the “Boettke Boys”.

http://economics.gmu.edu/pboettke/pubs/2005/new_comparative.pdf

http://economics.gmu.edu/pboettke/pubs/2006/Role_of_the_Economist_-_Final.pdf

Rodrik also wrote a great paper on the failure of regression analysis in development studies.

http://ksghome.harvard.edu/~drodrik/policy%20regressions.pdf

(This is not a paid advertisement)

[libertyfirst]

The article is interesting and instructive.

Even though I have no access to the literature as I'm not an economist, the part which talks about the recognition of Mises's works as seminal in business cycle and capital theory is not clear to me: I've never seen traces of Mises in papers or books I've read.

I know books are always born old, and most papers are out of reach because of my status, but I'm curious.

Who's interested in Mises in the mainstream and what do they say about cycles and capital theory?

[Sécessionniste]

Could you cite some papers by Acemoglu and Shleifer which show the Austrian influence on their work?