The modern definition of the word was first given by Alfred V. Espinas (1844-1922)[5], the French philosopher and sociologist; he was the forerunner of the Polish school of the science of effective action. The Austrian School of Economics was based on a philosophical science of the same kind. Thomas Mayer argued that because praxeology rejects positivism and empiricism in the development of theories, it is nothing less than a rejection of the scientific method. According to these theorists, with the axiom of action as a starting point, it is possible to draw conclusions about human behavior that are both objective and universal. For example, the idea that people participate in choice actions implies that they have preferences, and this must apply to anyone who exhibits intentional behavior. However, economist Antony Davies argues that since statistical tests are based on the independent development of theory, some form of praxeology is essential for model selection; Conversely, praxeology can illustrate surprising philosophical consequences of economic models. [19] The currency of the word praxeology is often attributed to Louis Bourdeau, the French author of a classification of sciences, which he published in his Théorie des sciences: Plan de Science intégrale in 1882: Les categories de praxéologie, la théorie générale et formelle de l`action humaine, as described by Murray Rothbard[3]. The French social philosopher Alfred Espinas gave the term its modern meaning, and praxeology was developed independently by two main groups: the Austrian school under the direction of Ludwig von Mises and the Polish school under the direction of Tadeusz Kotarbiński. [1] Under the influence of Tadeusz Kotarbiński, praxeology flourished in Poland. A “Special Center of Praxeology” (Zaklad Prakseologiczny) was founded under the organizational direction of the Polish Academy of Sciences with its own journal (from 1962), which was first called Materiały Prakseologiczne (Praxeological Works) and then abbreviated to Prakseologia. He has published hundreds of works by different authors and materials for a special vocabulary edited by Professor Tadeusz Pszczolowski, the leading praxeologist of the younger generation.
A comprehensive overview of the praxeological approach can be found in the work of the French statistician Micheline Petruszewycz “About Praxeology”. [9] The philosopher of science Mario Bunge published works of systematic philosophy that contained contributions to praxeology:[11] 407 and Bunge rejected Mises` version of praxeology as “nothing more than the principle of maximizing subjective utility – a sophisticated version of egoism.” [11]: 394 Bunge, who was also a sharp critic of pseudoscience, warned that “praxiology, when conceived in extremely general terms and detached from both ethics and science, has little practical value.” [11]: 394 proponents of praxeology also say that it provides information for the field of ethics. [14] The Italian philosopher Carmelo Ottaviano used the Italianized version Prassiologia in his treatises from 1935, but in his own way, as a theory of politics. After World War II, the use of the term praxeology became widespread. After Mises` emigration to the United States, his pupil Murray Rothbard defended the praxeological approach. In 1951, Murray Rothbard divided the subfields of praxeology as follows: With a different spelling, the word was used by the English psychologist Charles Arthur Mercier (1911) and proposed by Knight Dunlap to John B.