Murray N. Rothbard vs. the Philosophers - Ludwig von Mises Institute

REVIEWS AND COMMENTS BY MURRAY N. ROTHBARD 107
one rational discipline that demands the establishment of a
rational set of value judgments; political ethics is that subset
applying to matters of State. Mises and Leoni both deny
the existence of a rational, objective ethics; but Mises is at
least left with praxeology and economics and valid sciences;
Leoni is left with very little of “political science.”
Another point that might confuse the readers: Leoni
wrongly claims that the Weber position is one of “ethical
absolutism” but “epistemological relativism.” Mises, on the
other hand, correctly describes their general position as one
of “ethical relativism” and “epistemological absolutism.”
Despite what I consider the ultimate failure of this paper,
it is a good presentation of the Weber side of the dispute,
and rehabilitates Weber from many superficial or excessive
criticisms.
Ludwig von Mises,
“Epistemological Relativism in the
Sciences of Human Action” 56
The bulk of this essay by Mises, the preeminent economist
and praxeologist of our time, deals in his profound and
unique way with a defense of economics against such relativist
opponents as the historicists, who claimed that economic
laws must be relative to each historical epoch. There
are many excellent points made: an exposition of the
Windelband-Rickert 57 refutation of positivist methods in the
56Ludwig von Mises, “Epistemological Relativism in the Sciences
of Human Action,” in Schoeck and Wiggins, eds., Relativism, pp.
117–34.
57Wilhelm Windelband (1848–1915) and Heinrich Rickert
(1863–1936) were the most prestigious representatives of the
School of Baden. Exponents of neo-Kantianism, they saw philosophy
as a theory of values. The task of the philosopher was to establish
which were the values at the base of knowledge, morality, and art.
Another important contribution of Windelband and Rikert was their
reflections on the foundation of history as a science.