| The Failure of Empiricism |
|
|
|
| Written by Paul A. Cleveland |
| Thursday, 15 October 2009 08:46 |
|
In-Depth by: Paul A. Cleveland | Thursday, October 15, 2009
Nevertheless, the empiricist continues to rely upon the rules of logic. He must necessarily affirm the law of noncontradiction, the validity of cause and effect relationships, and, to some degree, the reliability of his senses. Without these he could not honestly continue his study of the cosmos. However, the empiricist derides certain deductive conclusions which arise from these accepted conditions of thought. Rather, he chooses to develop elaborate arguments to avoid these conclusions. This is more a matter of personal prejudice than of soundness of thought. Indeed, the philosopher who asserts that the empirical method is the only valid method of investigation is being illogical for his own assertion cannot be verified empirically. His assertion is a metaphysical statement. As arguments of empiricists have progressed, we have seen a downfall of knowledge and thought. This has been especially problematic in the study of economics since that area of inquiry necessarily begins with a deductive conclusion. That conclusion is that there is no such thing as a free lunch. This conclusion follows from the obvious observation that we are purposeful actors who live in a world marked by limited means to achieve our ends. This deductive conclusion needs no further verification. It remains a rock solid principle and no amount of empirical investigation can ever overthrow it. Nonetheless, it would appear that students are very perceptive. They reason in the following way. Since their teachers teach them that nothing can be known with certainty, then nothing can be known. Therefore, why do we bother attempting to discover something of reality, when in fact reality cannot be known? Within this framework of thinking, the student concludes that the educational process is merely a game we play. The winners of this game gain an advantage over their counterparts in society which allows them to acquire more material rewards. Moreover, even solid principles are questioned and often rejected as being nothing more than an opinion that they happen not to like. It should not surprise us, therefore, that moral principles are consistently rejected and that our civilization is crumbling around us. Students are merely acting out of what they have been taught is true. Specifically, they have bought into that totally illogical adage, "everything is relative." Thus, they are no longer interested in consistent, logical thought. As a result, the drift continues and society will slide further and further away from reality and from the truth of God.
Paul A. Cleveland is a professor of economics at Birmingham-Southernn College where he has taught since 1990. He received his Ph.D. in Economics from Texas A&M University. His principal academic research is focused on the study of political economy with a special emphasis on understanding the importance of free enterprise and entrepreneurial human action. His articles have appeared in numerous places including the Mises Institute, the Journal of Private Enterprise, The Freeman, The Independent Review, and Religion and Liberty. As a book writer he has published Understanding the Culture Wars: The Essentials of Western Civilization and Unmasking the Sacred Lies. Contact him at BoundaryStone --(205)-305-5862
|
| Last Updated on Monday, 16 November 2009 10:28 |



