한국 경제, 역대급 '퍼펙트 스톰'이 몰려온다(?)//이제는 각자가 '위기대응'을 준비해야 할 때
---> 정말로 퍼펙트 스톰이 온다면, 박근혜 대통령 당시의 어정쩡한 개혁이나 개입주의 경제정책으로는 그 태풍을 막을 수가 없을 것이다. 혁신적인 자유주의적 정책을 내놓아야 경제가 다시 살아날 수 있다. 하지만 지금 한국당의 경제 전문가들 역시 개입주의 경제에 익숙한 사람들이라, 문죄인의 나쁜 정책만 치우면 될 거라고 오판하고 있다.
거기에 좌파 단체와 조직이 사회 곳곳에 박혀 있어서 모든 개혁을 저지할 것이다. 문죄인이 싼 똥만 치우는 데도 힘에 겹다. 내가 한국의 미래를 암울하게 보는 이유이다.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
처음으로 우리는 미국의 이익, 노동자, 기업을 중국의 그것보다 앞세우는 대통령을 갖게 되었다.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
세상이 변하는 냄새를 맡았나!
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
그리고 두번째로 놀라운 일이 있는데, 아무도 이걸 모른다는 것이다.
----> 북한만이 이 놀라운 기적에서 예외이다.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
구글이 퀼렛의 언론 자유에 대한 기사를 "위험하고, 경멸적인"으로, 성 차이에 대한 기사를 "성적 내용"으로 분류했다. 미래는 작동 오류가 난 알고리듬이 사람들의 얼굴에 낙인을 찍을 듯 하다.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
위험을 감수하다 돈을 잃었다고 비난하는 것은, 병사가 다리를 잃었다고 그를 비난하는 것과 같다.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
상처나 하자, 성격적 단점 등은 인간과 유령을 구별하는 징표들이다.
----------------------------------------
------------------------------------------
인간을 연구하는 타당한 방법은 무엇인가?
미제스는 처음으로 인간 행동의 법칙은 통계적 또는 역사적 데이터와 관련해 실험될 수 없다는 것을 설명했다. 인간 행동의 연구에서는 과학에서와 반대로 우리는 인과적 법칙을 알고 시작한다.
우리는 인간이 소기의 목적을 달성하기 위해 주어진 방법을 의도적으로 사용한다는 사실을 알고 있다.
경제학의 법칙은 명확하게 알려진 공리(公理)에서 시작해, 그로부터 법칙들을 도출하는 방식으로 구성될 수 밖에 없다.
What Is the Proper Way to Study Man?
Murray N. Rothbard
[A review of Ludwig von Mises, Epistemological Problems of Economics; Essays in European Economic Thought, edited by Louise Sommer; and Richard von Mises, Probability, Statistics, and Truth.]
If the proper study of mankind is man, the question immediately arises: what is the proper way to study man? In recent generations, the enormous prestige gained by physics in advancing our knowledge of the material world has led to the uncritical transfer of the methods appropriate in the natural sciences to the study of actions of men. These three books illuminate different aspects of the important truth that the differences between the nature of human action and the behavior of unmotivated physical objects require different methodologies of scientific study.
Epistemological Problems of Economics
The science of economics has always had a separate methodology of its own; but, as in almost all successful sciences, it did not begin to examine and analyze its methodology until it had developed the bulk of its laws and principles. However, if a well-analyzed methodology is not established in time, a science is in danger of falling into gross error by wandering down plausible but invalid paths. In an age when many widely divergent and even contradictory paths of inquiry are open to economists, it is more important than ever that economic science develop a more critical awareness of its proper methodology. Ludwig von Mises's Grundprobleme der Nationalökonomie, published in 1933, was a monumental achievement in the study of economic methodology. While previous work by Senior, Cairnes, and Menger had vindicated the validity of economic theory, Mises's volume was the first to rid the methodology of economics of all traces of positivism and relativism. For the first time, Mises explained fully why the laws of human action (economics and, more widely, "praxeology") cannot be "tested" by reference to statistical or historical "data."
In the behavior of physical objects, science begins by empirical observation of constant relations, and then frames tentative hypotheses of explanatory laws, these hypotheses being always subject to testing and revision by referring their deduced consequents to controlled experiments, where all but the relevant, isolated factors are held constant. This is the "scientific method" of physics. But in the study of human action, as Mises shows, the reverse is true; here, we begin by knowing the causal laws: by knowing the fact of human consciousness, of free will, of motivated, purposeful action of human beings in using given means for the attainment of desired ends. On the other hand, the facts of human history are not, as in physics, controllable and subject to testing; they are the complex and changing resultants of the interplay of human motives and actions, impinging on the natural environment and on each other. The laws of economic science, therefore, can only be constructed by starting with apodictically known axioms and deducing from them a body of necessarily true laws.
The best-known modern work on economic methodology in the English-speaking world has been Lionel Robbins's An Essay on the Nature and Significance of Economic Science, published at about the same time as Grundprobleme. But Mises's book is a far more profound and basic work in the same general tradition, and its present translation as Epistemological Problems of Economics therefore fills a vital gap by bringing us the outstanding work on the methodology of economics.
Essays in European Economic Thought
Essays in European Economic Thought brings to the American reader translations of seven important European economic essays of the past century. Perhaps the outstanding article in the collection is the brilliant critique of mathematical economics by Paul Painlevé, an eminent French mathematician who wrote the essay as the introduction to the French translation of W. Stanley Jevons's Theory of Political Economy in 1909. Jevons's work was one of the first, and one of the least harmful, of the increasingly frequent incursions into economics of the mathematical method; and yet, in his critique of Jevons, Painlevé already saw the dangers and fallacies. The Austrian, praxeological tradition has always recognized that mathematics, and quantitative methods generally, are appropriate to the physical sciences, where behavior is continuous and unmotivated; but that verbal logic, in contrast, is the appropriate method where one is studying the necessarily discrete, motivated, qualitative actions of men. In a field where mathematical economists are too often inclined to dismiss critics as ignorant of mathematics, the arguments of this distinguished mathematician carry particular weight.
Probability, Statistics, and Truth
Richard von Mises's great classic, Probability, Statistics, and Truth, effected a revolution in the nature of probability theory during the 1920s and 1930s. "Classical" probability theory considered numerical probability to be derived from "equal ignorance" about the potential events being considered: thus, the probability of obtaining a "three-spot" upon the throw of a die was considered to be "one-sixth" because there are six possibilities and we do not know if one possibility is stronger than another. Mises (the brother of Ludwig von Mises), demonstrated the contradictions of this approach, insisting both that the probability is not one-sixth if the die happens to be loaded, and that the only way to find out if a die is loaded is by tossing it a large number of times. Thus was born the "frequency theory" of numerical probability, based on knowledge and not on ignorance. The frequency theory implies that to say the probability of a die showing "three" is "one-sixth" means that, if a die is thrown a great many times, the number of occasions on which "three" is obtained will approach one out of every six throws. But this means that numerical and mathematical probability theory cannot really apply to each single case, but only to the proportion of randomly-selected homogeneous events, as in tossing a coin or throwing a die. This fact is much more true of the unique, nonrandom events of ordinary human (and entrepreneurial) action. It becomes evident from Richard von Mises's fundamental work that mathematical probability theory can never be applicable to economics, or to any other study of human action.
At the present time, when mathematical probability theory is very heavily used in economics and sociology, the translation of the third German edition of Richard von Mises's work is particularly welcome. For Mises here refutes various modern criticisms of his theory and demolishes the attempts of such philosophers as Carnap and Reichenbach to establish a mathematical theory for individual cases, as contrasted to large homogeneous classes, of human actions.
This review is reprinted from the September 15, 1961, issue of The National Book Foundation.
----------------------------------------------------------
댓글 없음:
댓글 쓰기