Contra Per Bylund, surely the  psychological and social dynamics associated
with brain activity lie way beyond contemporary science, and the Mises
definition ducks these problems by retreating into ordinary language,
creating a definition which appears absurdly simplistic -  to me, and I
guess anyone with a scientific outlook.  Thus the request for some
alternative quick fix definition from John Medaille – which would inevitably
be just as simplistic – is unfair.

Bylund and Isaac however might reasonably defend Mises with the argument –
if a job is worth doing it is worth doing badly.  

And the reply to that argument is to ask – how badly? John Medaille seems to
suggest Mises does the job very badly indeed – introducing a socially
damaging ideology.  Sounds initially plausible, but I would welcome a few
more words on that matter from John.

Rob Tye