The linked article explains in some detail how Rothbard dismissed much of neoclassical theory based on simply not understanding the maths was valid for both ord

The linked article explains in some detail how Rothbard dismissed much of neoclassical theory based on simply not understanding the maths was valid for both ordinal and cardinal utility preferences. And the philosophical difference is much greater than rejection of interpersonal utility comparisons (a position shared by many neoclassical economists and ethicists) or a dislike of modern algebraic formalism shared with many economists of all stripes but Mises' insistence that economics is "not quantitative" and should instead be a set of conclusions drawn from axiomatic statements about human behaviour. Mainstream economists have written a great deal about the limitations of models, structural flaws of certain models, and identifying the circumstances in which past performance is unlikely to be a guide to future results but only Mises insisted the act of looking at the data was 'childish play with figures'