https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=LfduUFF_i1A
I've been thinking a philosophy thing should be on here.
I'd be up for it if you have something you'd like to talk about. Maybe there's other closet philosophers out there who would get involved? Maybe a good use case for the longer fomr nostr client too.
I'm no expert but I know enough to misquote myself into embarrassment.
Hope you find this Month Python sketch amusing
Amusing indeed! I had never seen this before and found it absolutely delightful.
What are your thoughts on these two propositions put forth by Austrian economists which I think are contradictory?
1. Value is subjective
2. There's such a thing as a misallocation of capital
Yes, these are economic statements, but I think they have philosophical implications.
Are the 2 statements MECE? It doesn't appear so. In this sense the 2 statements do appear contradictory.
However...
Philosophy is often caught in the net of language limitations.
It appears, re economics the definition of the 2 phrases may not be directly related to the common usage definitions, particularly "the misallocation" phrase but also (to some extent) the use of value and quality.
Upon scratching the surface, "the misallocation of capital" is more of a phrase and the definition of it as a whole can be different than the meanings of the individual words used to create it.
The field specific meaning of the phrase, the misallocation of capital, seems to embody an entire theory within economics. Looking briefly and with your question in mind the 'theory' of misallocation... does bring the 2 phrases closer together and succeeds to an degree.
Here, I feel you would find a means to reconcile these 2 so obviously opposing statements.
Wether or not they could ever be considered MECE (mutually exclusive and collectively exhaustive) I feel is doubtful. Therefore illogical in everyday parlance-
I suppose this would be the readers fault for not allocating the resources necessary, in the correct manner to gain the knowledge required to understand ;)
I will say that Economics uses philosophy and may, on a level create Economic Philosophy but must adhere to pure philosophy which is necessarily "a priori". It clearly doesn't always and bends philosophy to fit its agenda.
I often feel English needs more and better words
How did I do?
Agreed, philosophy is often constrained by language. I do think however that what matters is what one is pointing to with said language, more than the words themselves. Sometimes it feels like in philosophy it is for many philosophers more important to speak the right language than to advance their point.
What I mean when I say they're mutually exclusive is simply that one proposes that there is no such thing as objectively correct or incorrect actions. In other words: there are no mistakes...
...And the other assumes that mistakes can be made. The term misallocation is pointing to wrongful or sub-optimal action(s).
So it's true that maybe what one means when they use these phrases might be something else, but I haven't gotten that sense when discussing this with Austrians.
