This comprehensive study of probability considers the approaches of Pascal, Laplace, Poisson, and others. It also discusses Laws of Large Numbers, the theory of errors, and other relevant topics.

The reviewer welcomes Von Mises' book as a most valuable contribution to the nowadays so badly needed clarifying of philosophical terminology. The author confesses himself to positivism, but his work bears a far more psychological and significal stamp than those of most present positivists.

Like Hayek, Mises moved beyond economics in his later years to address questions regarding the foundation of all social science. But unlike Hayeks attempts, Misess writings on these matters have received less attention than they deserve. Theory and Histor, writes Rothbard in his introduction, "remains by far the most neglected masterwork of Mises. Here Mises defends his all-important idea of methodological dualism: one approach to the hard sciences and another for the social sciences. He defends the epistemological (...) status of economic proposition. He has his most extended analysis of those who want to claim that there is more than one logical structure by which we think about reality. He grapples with the problem of determinism and free will. And presents philosophy of history and historical research. Overall, this is a tremendously lucid defense of the fundamental Misesian approach to social philosophy. "It is Misess great methodological work, explaining the basis of his approach to economics, and providing scintillating critiques of such fallacious alternatives as historicism, scientism, and Marxian dialectical materialism. Austrian economics will never enjoy a genuine renaissance until economists read and absorb the vital lessons of this unfortunately neglected work." Theory and History should be required for any student of 20th century ideas. (shrink)

Von Mises defined a "physical" probability as a strict limit of the relative frequency of occurrence of an event in repeated trials. As a result of a number of criticisms of von Mises's approach, the more favored approach became the "propensity" interpretation. It is argued here that this interpretation is not compelling and that the only problem in von Mises's approach is the assumption that the relative frequency converges in a strict sense. This problem is then remedied (...) by deducing the axioms of probability theory from the assumption that the relative frequency converges only in the sense of the weak law of large numbers. (shrink)

RésuméNous analysons un épisode important dans ľévolution de la théorie des probabilityés: la phase?on;axioraatisation. La premiere approche de ce type fut proposeée par Mises en 1919. Elle šappuie sur le concept de collectif. La probabilityé y est définie comme la valeur‐limite de la fréquence relative. La seconde approche, élaborée en 1933 par Kolmogorov, šinscrit dans la lignée des travaux de Borel?on;inspiration purement analytique. Cette dernière axiomatique fut unanimement choisie tant par les théoriciens que par les empiristes. Après avoir présente (...) les divers arguments invoqués lors de la confrontation des deux théories, nous en proposons une interprétation épistémologique.SummaryWe analyse an important episode of the evolution of the theory of probability: the axiomatic phase. The first approach was proposed by Mises in 1919. It is based on the concept of “collective”. The probability is defined as the limit‐value of the relative frequency. The second one, elaborated by Kolmogorov in 1933, follows the work of Borel which is inspired by purely analytical considerations. This last axiomatisation was unanimously chosen by the theoreticians and empiricists. After having presented the different arguments raised when both theories were confronted, we suggest an epistemological interpretation.ZusammenfassungWir untersuchen eine wichtige Episode in der Entwicklung der Wahrscheinlichkeitsrechnung: die Phase ihrer Axiomatisierung. Der erste Versuch einer solchen wurde 1919 von Mises vorgelegt. Er stützt sich auf den Begriff eines Kollektivs ab. Die Wahrscheinlichkeit wird dabei als Grenzwert der relativen Häufigkeit definiert. Der zweite 1933 von Kolomogorov ausgearbeitete Versuch liegt in der rein analytischen Richtung, die von den Arbeiten Borels inspiriert wurde. Dieses Axiomatisierungsverfahren wurde einhellig sowohl von den Theoretikern als auch von den Empiristen vorgezogen. Nachdem wir die verschiedenen Argumente angeführt haben, die während der Konfrontation der beiden Theorien ins Feld geführt wurden, geben wir eine erkenntnis‐theoretische Deutung von diesen. (shrink)

What does it mean for ethics to say, as Wittgenstein did, that philosophy “leaves everything as it is”? -/- Though clearly absorbed with ethical questions throughout his life and work, Wittgenstein's remarks about the subject do not easily lend themselves to summation or theorizing. Although many moral philosophers cite the influence or inspiration of Wittgenstein, there is little agreement about precisely what it means to do ethics in the light of Wittgenstein. -/- Ethics after Wittgenstein brings together an international cohort (...) of leading scholars in the field to address this problem. The chapters advance a conception of philosophical ethics characterized by an attention to detail, meaning and importance which itself makes ethical demands on its practitioners. Working in conversation with literature and film, engaging deeply with anthropology and critical theory, and addressing contemporary problems from racialized sexual violence against women to the Islamic State, these contributors reclaim Wittgenstein's legacy as an indispensable resource for contemporary ethics. (shrink)

INTRODUCTION TO THE THIRD EDITION: FROM VALUE THEORY TO PRAXEOLOGY Ludwig von Mises (1881–1973) is arguably the most important economist of the twentieth ...

Preface LUDWIG von Mises published many books and articles in his long and productive life, each of them making important contributions to the theory and ...

Preface LUDWIG von Mises published many books and articles in his long and productive life, each of them making important contributions to the theory and ...

This memorandum was written at the request of Henry Hazlitt to provide Mises’s comments on and concerns about F.A. Hayek’s initial proposals for what became the Mont Pèlerin Society. Mises stresses that those who favor liberty and freedom and oppose totalitarianism must also oppose interventionism. The memo argues that those who fought and lost against the rising tide of totalitarianism at the turn of the 20th Century lost their battles because they settled for middle-of-the-road policies that conceded considerable (...) ground to the socialists. The weak point in Professor Hayek’s plan is that it relies upon the cooperation of many men who are today’s middle-of-the-roaders. As interventionists, they may not be the hoped-for intellectual pioneers to inspire people to build a freer world. (shrink)