Graduate studies at Western
|Abstract||JEL Classification: B41, B53, B31, B2, P48, A12 Abstract: Wittgenstein’s rule-following paradox has important implications for two aspects of Austrian theory. First, it makes it possible to reconcile the Misesian, Rothbardian, and hermeneutical approaches to methodology; second, it provides a way of defending a stateless legal order against the charge that such an order lacks, yet needs, a final arbiter.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Only published papers are available at libraries|
Similar books and articles
Diane Proudfoot (2004). The Implications of an Externalist Theory of Rule-Following Behavior for Robot Cognition. Minds and Machines 14 (3):283-308.
Jeffrey Hershfield (2005). Rule Following and the Background. Linguistics and Philosophy 28 (3):269 - 280.
Philip Pettit (1990). The Reality of Rule-Following. Mind 99 (393):1-21.
Konrad Graf, 19. “Action-Based Jurisprudence: Praxeological Legal Theory in Relation to Economic Theory, Ethics, and Legal Practice”.
Wes Sharrock & Graham Button (1999). Do the Right Thing! Rule Finitism, Rule Scepticism and Rule Following. Human Studies 22 (2-4):193-210.
Milan Zafirovski (2011). Weber's Sociological Elements in Mises' Economics of Human Action. Social Epistemology 24 (2):75-98.
Adam M. Croom (2010). Wittgenstein, Kripke, and the Rule Following Paradox. Dialogue 52 (3):103-109.
Added to index2009-02-16
Total downloads35 ( #39,262 of 739,406 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,269 of 739,406 )
How can I increase my downloads?