A Brief Summary of Human Action – How and Why Humans Act the Way they Do

Derrick J Freeman and Brandon Bryant discuss Chapter One of the book, “Man, Economy, and State” by Murray Rothbard. Chapter One is basically a review of Ludwig von Mises’ book “Human Action, A Treatise on Economics,” published ten years prior. We use the Study Guide created by Robert P. Murphy, a fellow of the Ludwig von Mises Institute. His summary of each chapter’s key points plus study questions at the end of each chapter are absolutely the perfect companion to this book. We invite you to buy a copy of each (or download the free ones) at Mises.org

If you like this, consider watching our discussion of Human Action here.

Now you can subscribe to Free Keene via email!

Don't miss a single post!


10 Comments

  1. Derrick J – You were using word for word other books to write this garbage. I use the plagiarism word because it fits what you are writing. If I am not changing my position with different words, it means your ridiculous articles are still being plagiarized.

    This is the credo of freekeeners. The only thing is the freekeeners think they are the logical people yet their track record shows different.

    Again, you plagiarized most of this article. Trust me, it doesn’t make you look smart. The author just doesn’t have logical capabilities.

  2. @runningwolfkenpo, speaking of logical capabilities, I have a couple of questions for you.

    If you or I don’t have a right to do something as individuals, how would it be possible for either or both of us to delegate that nonexistent right to people who call themselves government ?

    Is it possible for an individual to delegate a right which that individual doesn’t possess? How do “public servants” have more rights than the people they allege they serve? Where do the rights come from?

    I look forward to your attempt at a logical explanation.

  3. What is this? This so called “Ludwig von Mises Institute”

    “A 2000 “Intelligence Report” by the Southern Poverty Law Center, categorized the Institute as Neo-Confederate”.

  4. The church did not defy state orders. They followed the governor’s guidelines.

  5. Got it. So the SPLC says libertarians are “neo-confederate,” huh Jacks? Wow. That sounds really, really ominous.

    Wait. Weren’t those the same guys that placed Ben Carson, the current Secretary of the HUD, on one of their “extremist watchlists?”

    Hmm. Looks like the SPLC might be one of those activist sources you’re always so critical about. So why should anyone take what they say seriously, then? If you can think of a reason, please let us know.

  6. Bob C. – “If you or I don’t have a right to do something as individuals, how would it be possible for either or both of us to delegate that nonexistent right to people who call themselves government ?”

    If you are violating a person’s rights you are infringing on their rights. Just because the first amendment says freedom of the speech doesn’t give you the right to yell fire in a crowded room. There are multiple videos on youtube that clearly demonstrates this problem. Educate yourself fool.

    “Is it possible for an individual to delegate a right which that individual doesn’t possess? How do “public servants” have more rights than the people they allege they serve? Where do the rights come from?”

    You have some very colorful words in your statement. Again, everyone is not going to have the same ideas as someone else. Once it turns into a pissing match, it’s all over. Again, this is a very childish attempt to avoid the subject at hand. The rest of your ramblings and rants make no sense because you are a troll with no education and you can’t stick to the topic of the article.

  7. @Runningwolfkenpo, I didn’t think you would be able to logically address my questions. The answer is obvious, individuals cannot delegate rights they do not have. Thus, the legitimacy of government having “rights” which all of us individuals don’t have, is a mirage and demonstrably false.

    As far as me not staying on topic…not quite.

    A peaceful person when considering how and why to behave a given way (pertinent to the topic) would first consider whether or not they, as an individual, have a right to behave a given way, wouldn’t you say ? I realize it may take a bit more extrapolative powers than you presently possess to make that connection. In the future, I’ll use figurative crayons so you can follow along better, okay?

  8. Bob C. – Again, you show your infantile ability to have a conversation. You can deny my statements all you want but I know and you know they are true. Good luck living at the bottom of society’s well. No ladder will ever be lowered to you to help you go to the top. It’s sad your parents have absolutely nothing to do with you. Go spend your bitcoins which I doubt you have any, smoke all the dope you can to kill off most cells in your body. Because that is all you will ever be, Loser freekeener with nothing to show. Again, before you join the big boy’s table, make sure the highchair you sit in is tall enough to join the conversation.

  9. @runningwolfkenpo, that’s quite a platitudinous leaning essay. Have you been hitting the Vapid – er- izer again?

  10. Bob C. – Obviously you have a sick fascination with vaporizers to bring that up. That is quite disturbing. You are an obvious stalker as well. I know who you are. I called your local PD and explained you are sending very disturbing statements. Your local PD definitely knows who you are. You seem kind of “popular” with them. Now add being watched by your local PD. You step out of line, you will be arrested. You are a sad piece of pond scum.

Care to comment?