Subjectivism and Economic Analysis: Essays in memory of Ludwig ...

MISES AND LACHMANN ON HUMAN ACTIONa later work: ‘Phenomena of human action…display an intrinsicorder we dare not ignore: that which the human actors assigned tothem in the making and carrying out of their plans’ (Lachmann1990:136, emphasis in original). Lachmann can thus be perceived asraising two objections to Mises’s analysis. First, purposive orintentional behaviour can only be adequately comprehended in thecontext of plans. Second, this necessitates a focus on the individual.Through detailing problems with Mises’s account of human nature,it will be argued that Lachmann is correct on the first point,although the second point requires some modification.Mises’s emphasis on desires or preferences and beliefs, but notplans, suggests that his account of human action can be identified interms of drawing a conclusion from an Aristotelian practicalsyllogism. 9 Consequently, we have, for example:Major premise: I desire to eat something sweet;Minor premise: I believe that the eating of this cake is theeating of something sweet;Conclusion: Therefore, I eat this cake.This is also the understanding of action underlying modern rationalchoice theory (Sugden 1991). However, there is a major problemwith this understanding of human action. Say I desire to avoid painand believe that going to the dentist will lead to my incurring pain,then I conclude that I should avoid going to the dentist. However, Ialso desire that my broken tooth no longer disfigures myappearance, and believe that going to the dentist will lead to mybroken tooth being repaired, and thus conclude that I should go tothe dentist. Consequently, my desires and beliefs lead tocontradictory conclusions. The problem here is that we may want toreflect upon our desires and beliefs, and modify them. However,there is no component with the Aristotelian practical syllogism thatallows for such reflection.This immediately raises a problem for Mises’s argument. Accordingto Mises: ‘Praxeology…does not enter into a discussion of the motivesdetermining choice…. It deals with the choosing as such, with thecategorical elements of choice and action’ (1990:20–1).However, if it is intrinsic to the nature of choice that actingindividuals reflect upon the ‘motives determining choice’, then anytheory attempting to encompass the nature of choice must include43