Chicago School vs Austrian School

I usually listen to podcasts or whatnot before sleeping and last night I came across this interesting debate between David Friedman and Robert Murphy arguing for the Chicago School of Economics and the Austrian School respectively. I found it very engaging and, in fact, was very counter-productive since I had to listen to the whole thing which delayed my sleep. 

I love how both began by focusing on methodology. It's almost as classic as the rationalism vs empiricism debates you'll learn about when you study the history of philosophy. I love how it shows how different you could regard economic policy as derived from one's philosophical foundations.
I, as you may have noticed from reading this blog, obviously lean on the side of the Austrian School. Specifically, I am humbled by the accuracy of praxeology and Mises' understanding of human action. On a philosophical level, I am satisfied but I'm not the type to fully discredit or ignore the merits of the Chicago School or any other libertarian-leaning policies or ideas regardless of how it may differ from my own.
You see, David Friedman is the son of Milton Friedman (see also Milton Friedman's Pencil). I love Milton Friedman's methods of persuasion and arguing for libertarian-leaning ideas perhaps as much as I love Ron Paul, again, regardless of how we all may have philosophical differences. I can even say the same for Ayn Rand and the objectivists. I think it's more constructive to focus on similarities and set aside philosophical bickering so there could be a unified movement against the orthodox of statism.