My Discovery of Human Action and Mises as a Philosopher | Hans-Hermann Hoppe
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 17 май 2024
- “Sociology is in constant danger of thinking something is a law that is not a law. And economists frequently think that something is a hypothesis for the viable regularity when it is, in fact, a logically necessary truth. And Mises is a person who can set us right in all of this. and help us avoid these confusions that have invaded most of the social sciences.”
Presented at the 2024 Human Action Conference on Friday, 17 May 2024, at the Mises Institute in Auburn, Alabama.
Find free books, daily articles, podcasts, lecture series, and everything about the Austrian School of Economics, at Mises.org.
Twitter ► / mises
Facebook ► / mises.institute
Instagram ► / misesinstitute
SoundCloud ► / misesmedia
Apple Podcasts ► podcasts.apple.com/us/artist/...
Rumble ► rumble.com/c/c-2212754
Odysee ► odysee.com/@mises/
Podcasts ► mises.org/podcasts
I am German and never heard of Mises, Hoppe or any Austrian, until Covid. Then, in my boredome I came across Milton Friedman(the common free market entry drug that soon got replaced) , RUclips algorithm did the rest. Without Covid, I m not shure if this would have happend.
Thanks Hans, your birth was a unmeasurable gift to mankind
I also want to say that I highly prefer the US Mises Institute to the German one
That’s exactly my story as well. Interesting.
Grateful to have Hans back in Auburn. He is a hero in private property rights, economic thought, and political theory.
Could not agree more, he is a hero in latin America to many people.
Hans was in Auburn, AL? I wish I could have been there.
Hans Herman Hoppe is BACK
Good to see this man still sharing his knowledge, so to speak.
Outstanding 🖤💛
Hans is probably the best active intellectual in the world at this moment. By all his work, by the audience he attracts, by the impact he has on individuals. Absolutely great.
btw. Ayn Rand's "collective guilt" means that because values are interconnected, in social dynamics, you inevitably contribute to bad things in society, and to that extent you're guilty. Without this context, "collective guilt" can be used as an excuse for war crimes. And that's what anti-objectivists/Kantians in ARI and ARCUK are doing today. In objectivism, all guilt is individually earned. There is neither "collective guilt", nor "collective".
This collective guilt/collective punishment nonsense is precisely what made me unsubscribe to ARCUK after the oktober 7th events when it became clear that all the focus on future content would be directed into maintaining these anti-individual ideas. It has nothing to do with Objectivism.
What is ARI and ARCUK?
@@rla927 Ayn Rand Institute and Ayn Rand Centre United Kingdom
It's probably a sly remark about Objectivists support for Israel.
@DexterGraphic thank you
Yessir!
Ottimo Hoppe!❤
The goat
Thanks!
HHH ❤
The Triple H of philosophy
@@jpkm123g9 Hollywood Hulk Hogan, the triple H of wrestling 💪
💛🖤
@misesmedia I think, this is a very important lecture. Especially so for the history of ideas (with regards to the austrian school, of course). Is this also available as a text? Or is it going to be published somewhere?
In the future, I might want to quote it, but I have a particular distaste for quoting youtube videos. 😄
It will be published in a book, I guess
I really want to see him speak in person. Just don't think its practical in my situation unfortunately.
Where is Walter?
whats with walter block being dismissed as a senior fellow
lost my respect with that move
He's pro war.
theres a v. good & fair interview of walter block on michael malice's channel, (also a link there to hoppe's essay and walter's response.). worth a watch to see his views presented in the best light possible. hope sum1 can illuminate on the reasoning for the expulsion though
@@haruhiiragi6324 Hoppe's essay is the expulsion.
The search engines might want to know who the speaker is, no? Or is Triple H too spicy for the normie palette?
What happened to you people?
What do they put in your drinks?
why were you a left winger ???
Most people start out as left wingers, I think and then it dawns on them how stupid and wrong it is
Social environment he was brought up in. It was the mainstream thought in Germany and among his family and friends at the time.
This guy is hopelessly confused ! Karl Popper was not a positivist ! He did not think a proposition could be verified ! Hoppe continues ranting this untruth every time I hear him speak !
He was even worse with his "falsifiability" criterion.
No… you are taking it out of context…he literally says tangentially or “on the side” popper belonged to that group, and that statement corresponds to the facts….Popper can be called a falsificationist if you want to split hairs, but here he is reffering to who the leading names of the times were associated with…
If you've looked into Hoppe's writing, especially from his uni days, you'd know he was something of an expert on Popper and the epistemology of the Vienna circle and it's fellow travellors. I very much doubt that he could be "hopelessly confused" on the ideas of these philosophers.
@@BoomBustProfits @TheFeatink I think the problem is that, if you were to ask him, he would, of course, know of the differences and nuances between the different approaches. But he always presents things as if the two schools of thought could be put into one category.
- What he is criticising is, therefore, more of a tendency within academia, which is often encountered, although not necessarily and consistently argued for. You will often find that there are many people who follow both the position of Popper and of the logical positivists in their scientific approach, but they are often ignoring, or maybe not even knowing, that those two positions are incompatible with each other.
This being said, Hoppe is not emphasizing this distinction between the originators of those positions, and their followers, whose practice it is that is often times naive, and should be criticised with the arguments that Hoppe makes. Again, the problem is his neglect of making this point clear, and thereby he is misleading other people into thinking that those two things are one and the same.
In a sense, this can be seen as a strategic and even as a rhetorical device for the strenghening of the apriori position of Ludwig von Mises and his followers. But the problem is clear. Whether he is aware of it or not, remains an open question, but I find it very unlikely that he doesn't know of all this. What remains is the troubling problem that his depiction of it is very misleading to those who are not as educated as him.