Praxeology is a theoretical and systematic, not a historical, science. Its scope is human action as such, irrespective of all environmental, accidental, and individual circumstances of the concrete acts. Its cognition is purely formal and general without reference to the material content and the particular features of the actual case. It aims at knowledge valid for all instances in which the conditions exactly correspond to those implied in its assumptions and inferences. Its statements and propositions are not derived from experience. They are, like those of logic and mathematics, a priori. They are not subject to verification or falsification on the ground of experience and facts. They are both logically and temporally antecedent to any comprehension of historical facts. They are a necessary requirement of any intellectual grasp of historical events. Without them we should not be able to see in the course of events anything else than kaleidoscopic change and chaotic muddle.

The theorems attained by correct praxeological reasoning are not only perfectly certain and incontestable, like the correct mathematical theorems. They refer, moreover with the full rigidity of their apodictic certainty and incontestability to the reality of action as it appears in life and history. Praxeology conveys exact and precise knowledge of real things.

In this essay I use the perspective and intention of Szabonian deconstruction, as well as our insights from doing the same with Mises Regression theorem, to highlight Saifedean Ammous’ nefarious use and wrapping of academic scholars work notably including Mises, Hayek, and Nash as well as implicitly Szabo and Satoshi.

Further I highlight that Saifedean's account of how money originated and how moneyness originates in objects is based on an anthropologically inconsistent argument with reference to Jo Walton, “The analogy between Bitcoin and Yapese stone money is based on proposed commonalities that are inaccurate, ill-defined, and/or trivial.“

This essay then gives an example of how nefarious constructions can be ‘un-wrapped’ using Szabonian Deconstruction (properly framed inquiries) and it lays the beginning of my attempt to usefully frame an inquiry into the historical and cultural evolution of objects humanity has used as money as AND money-LIKE things (ie such proto-money, credit, wealth storage etc.).