芝加哥学派vs奥地利学派.docVIP

加哥学派对奥地利学派 (4fun( 2011-07-01( 3126 简介 芝加哥学派和奥地利学派都是自由主义的信奉者，但两者在方法论、关于繁荣和萧条的解释以及法律都存在差别。 People often ask me, How are the Austrians different from the Chicago School economists? Arent you all free-market guys who oppose big-government Keynesians? 人们经常问我，为什么奥地利学派和芝加哥学派的经济学者差别这么大呢？你们不都是反对大政府凯恩斯主义的自由市场派吗？ In the present article Ill outline some of the main differences. Although its true that Austrians agree with Chicago economists on many policy issues, nevertheless their approach to economic science can be quite different. Its important to occasionally explain these differences, if only to rebut the common complaint that Austrian economics is simply a religion serving to justify libertarian policy conclusions. 在本文中，我将列举出一些两者的不同之处，虽然事实上奥地利学派也同意芝加哥学派学者提出的许多政治主张，但是两者的经济学分析方法是很不一样的。我们有必要常常去澄清这种区别，否则就难以还击那些认为“奥地利经济学派只是为了证明自由主义政策主张正确的教条主义”的观点。 Before jumping in, let me give a few obvious disclaimers: I do not speak for all Austrian economists, and in this article I will be discussing modern Austrian followers in the tradition of Ludwig von Mises and Murray Rothbard. (On methodology in particular, the Austrians in the Rothbardian camp differ somewhat from those who look more to Friedrich Hayek and Israel Kirzner for inspiration.) Its also important to note that not every Chicago School economist thinks alike. Even so, I hope the following generalizations are representative. 在深入讨论之前，我觉得有几点是必须澄清的：我这里所说的不是所有的奥地利学派的经济学家，在这里我只讨论路德维希冯米塞斯和穆瑞·罗斯巴德一派的观点。（对于方法论而言，罗斯巴德一派的经济学者与哈耶克和伊斯雷尔·M.柯兹纳一派的学者迥然不同。）同样，我们也应该注意到芝加哥学派的经济学家的思考也存在着差异性。即使这样，我也希望下面的归纳是具有一定代表性的。 Methodology 方法论 The Austrians are oddballs among professional economists for their focus on methodological issues in the first place. Indeed, Misess magnum opus, Human Action, devotes the entire second chapter (41 pages) to The Epistemological Problems of the Sciences of Human Action. There was no such treatment in the last Freakonomics book. 奥地利学派很奇怪地首先从关注方法论开始。事实上，米赛斯的巨著《人类行为》花了整整第二章节（41页）的篇幅来讲“对人类行为的科学的认识论问题”。没有其他经济学书籍会这么处理。 Alt