Austrian Knights

Tonight, Dan Klein had lead the discussion at the weekly Austrian Knights event. The main point, at least as I took it, is the need for students to study Adam Smith. Adam Smith had begun with the Theory of Moral Sentiments. It is important to note that it is the questions of morality that Adam Smith begin with, but to say that if other economists do not begin with such questions, they are not doing economics is rather short. Economics is not the study of morals. We can not measure morals. It is only individual's making choices according to their preferences that help reveal the morality of the individual. This is not something that should be taken lightly. Morality and the study of ethics is a great assistance in learning about liberty, but they are not able to discuss economics. Economics defined famously by Lionel Robbins is "the science which studies human behaviour as a relationship between ends and scarce means which have alternative uses." This is not the study of m...

Mises had written, "There is a world of difference between a man who risks his life and property for a good cause and the man who sacrifices them without benefitting society in any way." Now which should we believe that politicians fall under? Which should economists fall under? Mises picks up again with, "Everything that serves to preserve the social order is moral; everything that is detrimental to it is immoral." Would most citizens view austrian economists as the first or the latter off of this statement? and government? Is then perception reality or just a faux pas?