Professional analyses on SFEcon’s demonstrata of a solved calculation problem (especially those emanating from a Libertarian perspective) never seem to cite anything specific to SFEcon. They do, however, reveal an epistemology whereby ‘economic calculation does not happen because it cannot happen’. Such findings are invariably based on Mises' utterly logical derivations from his perfectly sound observational premises.

While finding nothing askance in Mises’ observations nor in his logic, we nonetheless find his dicta scientifically insufficient: observation and logic certainly are the indispensable servants of science; but they are most reliably viewed as incompetent masters. Unsubstantiated reason cannot answer the paramount question of ‘which observations stand at the head of the deductions that best reveal the essence of our subject?’ Such questions do not occur in the familiar realms of pure reason (i.e.: Scholasticism, Objectivism, Libertarianism, Talmudism, etc.) even as they did not occur with much frequency in any material speculation prior to the Western scientific epoch.

Specifically Western science does not absolve the scientist from a responsibility to choose the most effective observational premise from among the plethora of possibilities that are always available. When the authentically Western scientific personality reasons from observation to an unsubstantiated conclusion, he discards his observational premise — not because it is necessarily false, but because this particular premise has proven sterile in respect to whatever phenomena is to be explained.

The economics profession’s logically unassailable conclusion upon the impossibility of economic calculation is, as we may observe, counter-implied by any and every observation upon economics' subject matter. Economic calculation has been evident in the efficient macroeconomics of insect superorganisms for thousands of millennia. And it is equally manifest in the human economy’s objective functioning — in its continuing, stable adaptations of improving technique into higher and higher material optima.

The subject matter of economics would not exist were it not in the nature of material beings’ collectives to direct their gross activities toward maximal returns. Absent such direction, no economic ‘system’ could persist on the dimension of time for long enough to reveal any systematic behavior. The question for economists should be ‘how does our hypothetical economic organism do it?’

The premises upon which the Vienna School has demolished any possibility of answering this question will be given respectful examinations in the segments to follow. But these will all be organized around our convictions that:

1. Premises (however true or false) are insufficient if they lead to conclusions that are contrary to observation, and

2. Economic calculation happens.