Improprieties of the Pretense of Knowledge

A nice speech on the topic by Daniel Klein of GMU. I posted about his views on central banking a while ago.

Coming from the Austrian School, speaking on such topics is like a cakewalk.

Knowledge has its counterpart in action, and your actions emerge from your normative calls in personal policy-making. On those two steps I propose to bring to the traditional Hayekian knowledge problem a prism of Smithian moral analysis. This approach perhaps sheds new light on the absurdities and profound quackishness of statist pretenses of knowledge.

He discusses how Knowledge entails three facets, information, interpretation, and judgment. We usually focus on information but not much on interpretation which is far more critical. There is a nice Sherlock Holmes story to show the difference.

The broader criticism is on government and regulators who seem to think they know what to do/regulate etc.

Nice bit…

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.


%d bloggers like this: