Does anyone else NOT like Austrian economics but like Carl Menger??

>>2477259
I like both to a certain degree, but I wouldn't call myself an "Austrian", since I think people who deliberately adhere to a school of thought (most pseuds on the internet calling themselves Austrians) are severely limiting themselves in what they can do, especially with respect to economics.

>>2477879
Can (You) explain the differences anon, It seems like a good opportunity to learn since you seem to speaking from some level of experience

>>2477951
I'm not quite sure what you mean, but I guess I'll try to explain myself a little bit.

Usually internet Austrians take on this bizarre epistemological aversion to any and all empricism, as if Austrian Economics demands radical a priorism (which they call Praxeology, which isn't what that word means or what Mises meant by that word.) Usually they learn their economics from jpegs of quotes from Rothbard or Hoppe, who are alright when actually read and understood, but sometimes they wrote very low and the understandings of most people match it.

How I see it, the "a priorism" of Austrian Economics comes from the fact that it is specifically a school that discusses theory, empirical matters are determined to be "economic history" by most of them, which is something I'd say is generally acceptable, but the issue comes when internet Austrians decide economic history isn't useful in illustrating and understanding theory, which is what it's good for. History cannot disprove theory, only theories can. This sounds close to a statement like "socialism has never been tried." but if we're talking from an austrian position, socialism was tried, and it failed for the exact reasons the Austrians said it wouldn't work.

on praxeology, it isn't so much of a method as mises trying to better explain what economics is as a social science as a theory of choice or action. (Notice that praxis is a word that literally means action.) Praxeology is pretty neat, i'd say, if not just because it accepts subjectivity and rationality and the fact that only humans acts and not groups (there are mob mentalities sure, but there is no asabiyyah or whatever.) It provides that neat and important understanding of why a person made a choice which is always "because it was the best one they could think of at the time with their knowledge."

Take what i'm saying with a grain of salt because I am no expert, just someone struggling my way through all of these things.

>>2478021
austrian econ is like the apriori logic set

its like math in that it starts with a few axioms or 1 in mises' case and works from there.

its useful for explaining certain shit like marginal utility.

the whole point u made about socialism is backwards. math is good for explaining shit and euclidean geometry is good for explaining flat shapes, but just because euclidean geometry doesnt explain non euclidean geometry doesnt make it retarded or even wrong.