Does the principle of action hold any epistemically value. Do people make decisi

Does the principle of action hold any epistemically value.
Do people make decisions as mises suggested.
What capital does Hayek account for that mises doesn’t.
Why did Hayek (why did I as well) start with cognitive science, then Econ, then finally law.
My argument is correct but you merely lack the domain knowledge to know so.
We all carry our group’s metaphysics with us and we all pursue our sex, class variation on our group evolutionary strategy, and we all think in the argumentative method our predecessors, and as such are captured by our cultural frames.
Mises and Rothbard’s Jewish diaspora of the pale and pilpul. Hoppe’s German free cities and kantian rationalism, hayek’s synthesis of German and Anglo, my work in Anglo empiricism in the era of computational models, cognitive science, linguistics.
It’s not that mises wasn’t innovative, it’s that he was rejected and still largely ignored because like many others of his era he contributed but ultimately failed and for the reasons I’ve stated. And in part because rothbard made everything worse. I wish more people understood the menger mises Hayek arc because it was in fact social science of human behavior desperately seeking a formal,theory of incentives. It’s most compatible with natural law – a falsificationary logic of behavior. But because mises and rothbard intentionally avoid the commons as capital, and Hayek explicitly accounted for it, we find functional immorality in mises and rothbard.
It’s obvious that mises understood he had failed by the end of his life. Just as did Marx. But we can learn from the attempt just as we can learn from nietzsche’s attempt – but only when we do not fail as they did by not understanding and accounting for their limits.

Reply addressees: @StephaneGeyres @LudwigArisleib @FromKulak @ViandeTiede666 @paulericblanrue @arthurhomines