Skip Navigation


Cambridge Journal of Economics Advance Access originally published online on June 21, 2006
Cambridge Journal of Economics 2007 31(2):255-274; doi:10.1093/cje/bel017
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
31/2/255    most recent
bel017v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Prychitko, D. L.
Right arrow Articles by Storr, V. H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Related Collections
Right arrow P16 - Political Economy
Right arrow B41 - Economic Methodology
Right arrow D63 - Equity, Justice, Inequality, and Other [...]
Right arrow D70 - General
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2006. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Cambridge Political Economy Society. All rights reserved.

Communicative action and the radical constitution: the Habermasian challenge to Hayek, Mises and their descendents

David L. Prychitko and Virgil Henry Storr*

* Northern Michigan University and George Mason University, respectively

Address for correspondence: Dr Virgil Henry Storr, 1714 Connecticut Avenue NW, Washington DC 20005; email: vstorr{at}tsd.biz

This paper evaluates Jurgen Habermas's typology of action and his recent call for a radically democratic rule of law. The theory of action that Habermas develops, however, differs significantly from the science of action (praxeology) of the Austrian school. As such, it represents a methodological challenge to Austrian praxeology. Additionally, Habermas's criticism of the welfare state is shown to be somewhat consistent with Hayek's criticisms, but his alternative to the welfare state challenges the political vision of many Austrian economists. This paper attempts to demonstrate that both Habermas's and the Austrian school's efforts suffer from similar weaknesses and epistemological pretences.

Key Words: Austrian economics • Habermas • Praxeology • Rule of law • Welfare state

JEL classifications: B41, D7, D63, P16

Manuscript received December 1, 2003; final version received February 22, 2006.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.