heterodox thread -was Re: [Pen-l] Austrians

[Eugene Coyle <eugenecoyle@xxxxxxx>]

The exchange on heterodox economics made me think of the US economists  
-- including at least one Nobelist -- who successfuly attacked and  
crushed the Notre Dame economics department.  And it made me think of  
Harvard's econ department which nixed an intoductory class to be  
offered by Marglin, though my memory of the details on that is gone.
	Both are indications of well-deserved insecurity.

Gene Coyle


On Mar 2, 2009, at 12:51 PM, McDonough, Terrence wrote:

> > If I remember correctly, at the ASSA convention, Terry McDonough
> described the Austries as "pretenders to the neoclassical throne"
> rather than being truly heterodox. Whether I got the quote right or
> not, it's apt.  Was it "ruling paradigm in waiting," Terry?<
>
> Orthodoxy in waiting.  The underlying argument is that orthodoxy in  
> the case of economics has a distinctive sociology of knowledge as  
> apologetics for capitalism and cannot be defined solely by a list of  
> substantive propositions.  In parallel the heterodox must break with  
> that sociology and not just this or that proposition of neoclassical  
> economics.
>
> Portes' comments remind me of similar discussions many years ago in  
> which the Bowles and Gintis AER articles were cited as proof that  
> good heterodoxy can get into the top journals.  No one mentioned  
> these articles were in the not so respected conference proceedings  
> issue where I suspect they were included precisely to encourage this  
> kind of confusion.
>
> Terry
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> pen-l mailing list
> pen-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l

_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
pen-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l