 objectives of the "technostructure" of large business firms in acceding to these demands and deciding what part of the cost increase to pass on to consumers. Thus, according to Mises,

If what these disciplines [i.e., the aprioristic and the natural sciences] teach is insufficient or if the historian chooses an erroneous theory out of several conflicting theories held by the specialists, his effort is misled and his performance is abortive.

But what exactly is the historical method of specific understanding, and how can it provide true knowledge of a wholly subjective and unobservable phenomenon like human motivation? First of all, as Mises emphasizes, the specific understanding of past events is

not a mental process exclusively resorted to by historians. It is applied by everybody in daily intercourse with all his fellows. It is a technique employed in all interhuman relations. It is practiced by children in the nursery and kindergarten, by businessmen in trade, by politicians and statesmen in affairs of state. All are eager to get information about other people's valuations and plans and to appraise them correctly.

The reason this technique is so ubiquitously employed by people in their daily affairs is because all action aims at rearranging future conditions so that they are more satisfactory from the actor's point of view. However, the future situation that actually emerges always depends partly on the purposes and choices of others besides the actor. In order to achieve his ends, then, the actor must anticipate not only changes affecting the future state of affairs caused by natural phenomena, but also the changes that result from the conduct of others who, like him, are contemporaneously planning and acting. Understanding the values and goals of others is thus an inescapable prerequisite for successful action.

Now, the method that provides the individual planning action with information about the values and goals of other actors is essentially the same method employed by the historian who seeks knowledge of the values and goals of actors in bygone epochs. Mises emphasizes the universal application of this method by referring to the actor and the historian as "the historian of the future" and "the historian of the past," respectively. Regardless of the purpose for which it is used, therefore, understanding

aims at establishing the facts that men attach a definite meaning to the state of their environment, that they value this state and, motivated by these judgments of value, resort to definite means in order to preserve or to attain a definite state of affairs different from that which would prevail if they abst
objectives of the " technostructure " of large business firms in assent to these requirement and deciding what part of the cost addition to pass on to consumers. Thus, harmonize to Mises, 

 If what these disciplines [ i.e., the aprioristic and the natural science ] teach is insufficient or if the historian chooses an erroneous theory out of respective conflicting theories held by the specialists, his campaign is misled and his performance is abortive. 

 But what exactly is the historical method of specific agreement, and how can it provide true knowledge of a wholly immanent and unobservable phenomenon like human motivation? First of all, as Mises emphasizes, the specific agreement of past events is 

 not a genial process entirely resorted to by historians. It is applied by everybody in daily sexual intercourse with all his fellows. It is a technique employed in all interhuman relations. It is practiced by children in the nursery and kindergarten, by businessmen in trade, by politicians and statesmen in affairs of state. All are eager to get information about other people's evaluation and plans and to appraise them correctly. 

 The cause this proficiency is indeed ubiquitously employed by people in their casual affairs is because all legal action aims at rearranging future condition so that they are more satisfactory from the actor's point of view. However, the future situation that actually emerges always depends partially on the purposes and choices of others besides the actor. In order to achieve his ends, then, the actor must anticipate not only changes affect the future state of affairs caused by natural phenomena, but besides the changes that result from the conduct of others who, like him, are contemporaneously planning and acting. Understanding the values and goals of others is thus an inescapable prerequisite for successful natural process. 

 Now, the method that supply the individual planning action with data about the values and goals of other actors is basically the same method employed by the historian who seek knowledge of the value and goals of actor in bygone epochs. Mises emphasizes the universal application of this method acting by referring to the actor and the historian as " the historian of the future " and " the historian of the past, " respectively. Regardless of the purpose for which it is practice, therefore, understanding 

 aims at establishing the facts that men attach a definite meaning to the department of state of their environment, that they value this state and, motivated by these judgments of value, resort to definite means in order to save or to achieve a definite state of affairs different from that which would prevail if they abst
 obuectives of the "technostvucture" of large businevs firjs in aczeding to these demands and vecieing qhat part of the cost kncrease no pass ob to xonsumers. Vgus, according bo Mivxs,

If what these disciplinas [i.e., the aprimrkscic and the natural sciences] teach if insufgifient or if thg hisuoryan dhooses an erroneous theory out of severan conflicting theories held by the speclalidts, his effort is lisled and yis [wrformance ir abortive.

But what exadtly is the historical method ow speeific underwtqndltg, and how ran it provide truc knowladge of a wholly subjcctivx ane unobservable phenomxnon like human motidation? Fissc of all, as Mises empyawizes, the spezufiz uhdxrsfandinh oh past evenfs is

not a nental process exclisynrly resorted to by hystorians. It is applied by everybody in dajly intercourse with alo his fellows. It is a techniquq employed in all interhuman relations. It is pracdiced cy emlldrdb ln the nursery and kindergarten, by businessmeg im nrade, by politicicns and statesmem ln wffairs of stxte. All ade eager to get invormatijn abiut other peolle's valuations and plans abd to appraifw them correctly.

Thz reason thir tevhniqie is so ubiquitously eoploged by peoppe in thejf daily affairs ks necduse all action aims at rewrranging futbre condktioms so ehat they wre more satisfactory frlm thg actos's point ov view. However, the future situavmon that actuslny vmerges ajways depends partjy on the purppses anb choizes of othvrs besidxs the actor. In order to dfhieve his eids, then, ehe qctoe must xvticipate not pnly chanyts affectibg the future statc of xrfairs caused bv batural phenomema, cut apsp eve changes tvat fesjkt frum the condmct of pthers who, like him, dre dontemporaneously llwnning abd actind. Understandimg the values and hoals of othets ys thus an inescapable prerequjsite for sugcessful actijn.

Noq, the method that provides the individual planning ection with information about the values aud goals of ovher astors is assentially the same method employed ny the historian who sseks ktowlefge of the values and goals of actors in bygone epochs. Mises emphasizes tye unitewsal applicztiom of nhif methoq by ceferring to the sctor and the historian as "the iistorian mf the future" and "the historiam uf the past," rgspectively. Regardless of fhe purppse for which it is used, therefpre, understanding

aims at establiwhing the facts that men attach a definnte meqning ti thc state of thekr rnyironment, hhat tkey value this state and, motivatee by tyede judgments of talue, resort uo defihite mgans in order to lressgve ot to attain a cefinite state of affairs differenn fwom that which sould prevaik if jkvy abst
objectives of the "technostructure" of large business acceding these demands deciding what part pass to consumers. Thus, to Mises, If these disciplines [i.e., the aprioristic and natural sciences] teach is insufficient or if the historian chooses an erroneous theory of several conflicting theories held by the specialists, his effort is misled and performance abortive. what is the historical method of specific understanding, and how can it provide true knowledge of a subjective and unobservable phenomenon like human motivation? First all, as Mises emphasizes, specific understanding of past events not mental process resorted by It is applied everybody in daily intercourse with all his fellows. It is a technique employed in all interhuman relations. is practiced in the and by in trade, by statesmen in affairs of state. All get information about other people's valuations and plans to appraise correctly. The reason this technique is ubiquitously employed by people in their daily affairs because all action aims at rearranging future conditions so that they are more satisfactory from point of view. However, future situation that emerges depends on purposes and of others besides the actor. In order to achieve his ends, the actor must anticipate not only changes affecting the future affairs by natural phenomena, also the changes that from conduct of others who, are planning the and of others is thus inescapable prerequisite for successful action. the method that provides information about the values and goals of other is essentially the same method employed by historian who seeks knowledge of the values and goals of actors in epochs. Mises universal application of this method by referring to actor and the historian "the historian of the future" and "the historian of past," Regardless of purpose for which is used, therefore, aims at establishing that men a meaning of their environment, that they value state motivated by these judgments of resort means in order to preserve or to attain a definite state of affairs different from would prevail if they
 objectives of the "technostruCture" of larGe busIneSs fIrMs in AcceDing to these demANds aNd deciding what part of thE cost InCReasE To Pass oN to consUMeRS. thuS, aCcOrdInG To mises,

if wHat thesE disciplinEs [i.E., tHe aprioristiC AnD the naturaL scIences] teach iS inSufficIeNt oR If the HisToriaN choosES an errOneous theOrY Out of sEVeral coNFLiCtinG theories held by thE SpECialists, his effOrt is mIsLEd AND hiS peRformance iS aBortiVE.

But whaT ExACTLy iS The historical Method of speCIfiC underStAndINg, and hOw can It PRovIde true knowLedgE of a whollY subjeCTive and UNobservAble phEnoMenOn liKE hUmAn mOtIVatIOn? firST of All, as MisEs EmPhasiZes, tHE SPEcifIc uNderStandIng of past evenTs iS

not A MenTal prOcess ExclUsIvely ResortEd to bY hIstorians. It is apPlieD by everybOdy In DaiLy InterCOurse wIth All His fellOws. It is A TecHnIQUE eMployed in all interhUmAN ReLations. IT is praCTiCeD By childrEn In tHe nuRSEry anD kinDErGarten, by BusineSSmEn In trade, By PolitiCiAns And StateSMen iN affaiRs of statE. All aRE eager to get infORmation about oTHeR PEoPLe's vAluAtions and plAns aND to aPpraISe TheM CorreCtly.

THe REaSOn this technique is so UbIquitoUsly eMployed by peopLe in their dAILY affairs Is beCAuSE all action aims At reaRranging fuTUre condiTions So that thEy are more SATisfactoRy fRom The ActOR'S pOint of view. HowEVEr, thE fUture siTuaTion thaT acTuaLly EmeRgEs always dEpends paRtLy On ThE puRposeS And choicEs Of oThErs BesidES the acTor. In OrdeR tO aCHieVe his enDS, tHEN, the AcToR musT anTiCipatE not ONly Changes Affecting The FUturE sTaTe of affAirs caused by nAtUral phenomEnA, buT also tHE Changes tHat result from the conduct OF others Who, Like hIm, arE contempoRanEously PlaNNing anD actinG. UndeRsTanDINg the VALuEs aNd Goals of othERS is Thus aN iNescApable pRerequisite for succESsfUl action.

Now, thE meThod THAt ProVIdES thE iNDivIDUal planning actiOn with infoRmATiOn about the VAluEs And goalS of otheR actoRS is esseNtially thE same methOd EmplOYEd bY the historIan who seEks knowleDGe of tHE vAlues And Goals oF aCtoRs in bYgone ePOchS. MiseS emphaSiZes the UniveRsAl applicAtion of this method by refeRring tO the aCtoR and the hiStoRIan As "the histOriaN of the futuRe" aNd "tHe hisTorIAn of tHe paST," rEspECtiveLy. ReGArdless of THe PurPOSe For which it iS USEd, tHerefOre, UNderstAndiNg

aims at establishINg the facts that Men aTTAch A deFInitE mEaning to the staTe oF tHEIr enviroNmEnt, that they Value thiS sTAte anD, motivAted by These juDGMeNTs of vaLue, rEsoRt to definIte MeANs in ordEr To PReservE or tO aTtain a DefiniTE staTE Of affairs differeNt froM THat whICh wOuld pReVail if tHEy abSt
 objectives of the "techno structure"  of l arg e b us ines s fi rms in accedin g  tothese demands and deci dingwh a t pa r tof th e costi nc r e ase  t opas so nto co nsu mers. T hus, accor din gto Mises,

I f  w hat thesedis ciplines [i. e.,  the a pr ior i sticand  thenatura l  scien ces] teac hi s insu f ficient o rif t he historian choo s es an erroneous t heoryou t  o f sev era l conflict in g the o ries he l db y the specialists,his efforti s m isledan d h i s perf orman ce isabortive.
Butwhat exac tly is the his t oricalmethod  of  sp ecif i cun der st a ndi n g,  an d  ho w can it  p ro videtrue k n o wled geof a  whol ly subjective  an d un o bse rvabl e phe nome no n lik e huma n mot iv ation? First of  all , as Mise s e mp has iz es, t h e spec ifi c u ndersta nding o f  pa st e v en ts is

not a menta lp r oc ess excl usivel y  r es o rted toby  hi stor i a ns. I t is ap plied by  every b od yin dail yinterc ou rse  wi th al l  his  fello ws. It i s a t e chnique employ e d in all inte r hu m a nr elat ion s. It is pr acti c ed b y ch i ld ren in th e nur se r ya nd kindergarten, by  b usines smenin trade, bypolitician s a nd state smen in affairs of sta te. A ll are eag e r to get  info rmationabout oth e r  people' s v alu ati ons a nd  plans and to a ppra is e themcor rectly. 

T herea son  t his techn ique isso  u bi qu ito uslye mployedby  pe op lein th e ir dai ly af fair sis bec ause al l  a c t ionai ms  atrea rr angin g fu t ure  condit ions so t hat they  a re  more s atisfactory f ro m the acto r' s p oint o f view. Ho wever, the future situa t ion tha t a ctual ly e merges al way s depe nds partly  on th e pur po ses a nd ch o i ce s o fothers bes i d esthe a ct or.In orde r to achieve his e n ds,  then, the ac tor  mus t an tic i pa t e n ot onl y changes affecti ng the fut ur e  s tate of af f air scausedby natu ral p h enomena , but als o the cha ng es t h a t r esult from  the con duct of o t hersw ho , lik e h im, ar econ tempo raneou s lyplann ing an dacting . Und er standing  the values and goals o f othe rs is  th us an ine sca p abl e prerequ isit e for succ ess ful  acti on. 
Now,  the me tho d  that  pro v ides thei nd ivi d u al  planning a c t i onwithinf o rmatio n ab out the values an d  goals of othe r ac t o rsise ssen ti ally the samemet ho d employed  b y the histo rian who  s e eks k nowled ge ofthe val u e sa nd goa ls o f a ctors inbyg on e  epochs .Mi s es emp hasi ze s theuniver s al a p p lication of this  meth o d  by r e fer ringto  the ac t or a nd the his torian as " the hi stor ian o f the f ut ure" a nd"t he histori a n of thepast, " respe ct ivel y.Regard less o f the  pur po sefor which i ti sus e d,ther efore ,unde rstanding 
aims at  es t ablishi ng  th e factst ha t men attach  adefin i t e meaningt o th e  s t ate o f thei r envi ronment ,  th at  they v alu e this stat e and, mo t iva te d by  these j ud gmen ts  of  v alue, resort to  definit e meansi n  order  to pres e rve or  t o attain a d efini te state o f aff airs di f fer ent  fr om t hat  whi c h would prevail if theyabst 
 objectives_of the_"technostructure" of large business_firms in_acceding_to these_demands_and deciding what_part of the_cost increase to pass_on to consumers._Thus,_according to Mises,

If what these disciplines [i.e., the aprioristic and the natural sciences] teach_is_insufficient or_if_the_historian chooses an erroneous theory_out of several conflicting theories_held by_the specialists, his effort is misled and his_performance_is abortive.

But what_exactly is the historical method of specific understanding, and_how can it provide true knowledge_of a wholly_subjective_and_unobservable phenomenon like human_motivation? First of all, as Mises_emphasizes, the specific understanding of past_events is

not a mental process exclusively resorted_to by historians. It is applied_by everybody in daily intercourse_with all_his fellows. It is a_technique employed in_all interhuman_relations. It is_practiced by children in the nursery_and kindergarten, by_businessmen in trade, by politicians and_statesmen_in affairs of_state._All_are eager_to get information_about_other people's_valuations_and plans and to appraise them_correctly.

The_reason this technique is so ubiquitously employed_by people in their_daily_affairs is because all_action aims at rearranging future_conditions so that they are more_satisfactory from_the actor's_point of view. However, the future situation that actually emerges always_depends partly on the purposes and_choices of others besides_the actor._In_order to achieve_his_ends, then,_the actor must anticipate not only changes_affecting the_future state of affairs caused by_natural phenomena, but also_the_changes that result from the conduct_of others who, like him, are_contemporaneously planning and acting. Understanding_the_values_and goals of others is_thus an inescapable prerequisite for successful_action.

Now, the method_that provides the individual planning action with_information_about the values and goals of_other_actors is essentially the same method_employed_by_the historian who seeks knowledge_of the values and goals of_actors in bygone epochs. Mises emphasizes the universal application_of this method_by referring to the actor_and_the_historian as "the historian of the future" and "the historian_of the_past," respectively. Regardless_of the purpose for which it is used, therefore, understanding

aims_at establishing the facts that men attach_a definite meaning to the state of their environment, that they_value this state and, motivated by these judgments_of value, resort to definite means in_order to preserve or_to_attain a definite state of affairs different_from_that_which_would prevail if_they abst