MISES: Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy, Law and Economics https://revistamises.org.br/misesjournal <div style="text-align: justify;"> <p dir="ltr">MISES: Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy, Law and Economics , scholarly and peer-reviewed journal (print and on-line) published three times a year by Instituto Mises Brasil which was founded in 2007. The topics covered in the journal mainly include (but not limit to): Epistemology and Ethics, Economics, Methodology and Praxeology, History of Economic Thought, Society, Legislation and Politics, Culture and Freedom.&nbsp;</p> <p dir="ltr">The journal is published in Portuguese, Spanish and English. The e-journal provides free and open access to its content on our website.</p> </div> Instituto Mises Brasil en-US MISES: Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy, Law and Economics 2318-0811 <p>&nbsp;</p> <p><a href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/" rel="license"><img style="border-width: 0;" src="https://i.creativecommons.org/l/by/4.0/88x31.png" alt="Creative Commons License"></a><br>&nbsp; This Journal is licensed under a <a href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/" rel="license">Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License</a>.</p> Contrasting the role of the serendipity in austrian and neoclassic theories https://revistamises.org.br/misesjournal/article/view/1251 <p>The serendipity, as likes as any another change, is a constant in the human action and we are not lacking examples in the history, as the discovery of the penicillin, to see its great importance role at the innovation process. But, despite this importance, the serendipity is excluded of the neoclassic models, because of its static equilibrium approach and also for the treatment of knowledge. On the other hand, the Austrian methodology, for considering the dinamic efficience, the market as a process, the future as something to be made and the knowledge as disperse and to be discovery, it’s the best approach for the investigation of the occasional generation of innovation, called <em>serendipy.</em></p> Artur Marion Ceolin Copyright (c) 2019-12-20 2019-12-20 8 10.30800/mises.2020.v8.1251 Moral considerations about taxes https://revistamises.org.br/misesjournal/article/view/1228 <p>This paper presents the positions of different currents of thought regarding taxation. Initiating the confrontation between the currents throughout history, by presenting the current of Catholic theology; followed<br>by how natural law answers the question of tax morality, as well as the scholastic view on the problem, the thinking of the classical liberals and the Austrian school, and finally, in order to put the question in contemporary, seeking to answer whether Tax collection is just or not.</p> Eric Villac Pinheiro Copyright (c) 2019-12-20 2019-12-20 8 10.30800/mises.2020.v8.1228 Why regulate utilities? https://revistamises.org.br/misesjournal/article/view/1217 <p>The modern economic theory defines regulation as a necessary measure in utilities’ markets due to a supposed low compettitivity in those industries. Altough the regulatory methods which ar used in those industries have been consantly criticised for their inefficiency, th belief that the regulations are necessary has been kept unchanged. Therefore, the obective of this article is to prove that the convencional economic arguments that justify regulation in utilities are based on misled premises about these industries’ dynamics.</p> Harold Demsetz João Felipe Rodrigues Lanza Copyright (c) 2019-12-20 2019-12-20 8 10.30800/mises.2020.v8.1217 The Austrian School of Economics and the Mainstream: https://revistamises.org.br/misesjournal/article/view/1188 <p>After the 2008, crises in the academic world started to look for differents views that could explain and satisfy the general public about economics phenomena. The Rebulding Macroeconomics Project arises on this context, reuning mainstream economists who made some suggests to improve economics. On the other hand, it’s very important realize that some austrian economists – who predicted the financial crises – were left out or on the sideline of this debate. This paper, therefore, aims to point out the means to be explored by austrian economists for establishing open dialogue and seeking better insertion in the main economic debates, using as reference the project carried out by The Oxford Review nad the DSGE model.</p> Marcel Pereira Bernardo Copyright (c) 2019-11-29 2019-11-29 8 10.30800/mises.2020.v8.1188 Two foundations for praxiology: https://revistamises.org.br/misesjournal/article/view/1219 <p>Ludwig von Mises defended the controversial thesis that the economy is governed by a priori principles, against the positivist analysis of science (including economics). I intend, in this essay, to present a defense of Mises’s thesis. I begin by analyzing the influence of Kantian epistemology on Mises’s project and the improvements that Mises bequeathed to it. Given the objections to the Kantian position, on the basis of a Wittgensteinian critique of psychologism, I argue, based on a recent analysis by Roderick T. Long, that Mises’s project may actually be seen as an elaboration of Wittgenstein’s: the arguments for the conclusion that everything that counts as thought involves logical principles can be extended to show that everything that counts as action involves economic principles, an argument that would summarize Mises’s praxeology.</p> João Pinheiro Silva Copyright (c) 2019-11-29 2019-11-29 8 10.30800/mises.2020.v8.1219