The guiding principles of Paine’s praxeology was positive rather than normative analysis, which is somewhat akin to the difference between the practice of internal medicine rather than that of surgery.
An internist, a surgeon, and a pathologist decided that they were working too hard and that they should go duck hunting together. A couple of mornings later found them sitting in a duck blind waiting for the birds. Pretty soon a bird appeared on the horizon.
The internist watched it carefully as it came over and said, “Gentlemen, observe the colorful plumage, the quacking call and the web feet trailing behind.”
As the bird disappeared out of range, he said, “Based on my observation, I would venture that we have seen a duck, but further tests may be necessary before we decide on a course of action.”
The other doctors looked blankly at him, but there was a slight sneer from the surgeon. It wasn’t long until another bird appeared. They waited until it came closer and then the surgeon leaped to his feet with his gun. Blam… Blamm… Blaaaammm…
Feathers and entrails and gobbets of flesh rained down from the explosion overhead. Something identifiable as a carcass was floating on the water, and the surgeon turned to the pathologist: “Okay. Would’ja mind getting that damn thing and tell me if it was a duck?”
Positive economics – a la Paine – is observationally descriptive while normative economics is interventionally prescriptive.
Truer today than then. What foresight!
The guiding principles of Paine’s praxeology was positive rather than normative analysis, which is somewhat akin to the difference between the practice of internal medicine rather than that of surgery.
Positive economics – a la Paine – is observationally descriptive while normative economics is interventionally prescriptive.