Re: Game theory and heterodox analysis

[ALUTZKER@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]

I agree it would be nice to have a discussion on favorite lines
of heterodox research, and that the general reluctance to engage
is itself of interest.  So, with all due apologies, here is a
biased, under-thought list, to open discussion.

1) Mirowski is the author I find most exciting to read - he
feels sophisticated and up to date intellectually in a way
few others due.  That being said, his historical revisions
seem more sucessful to me than his alternative neo-institutionalist
formalism, although it is a bold, fledgling research program.
2) In general, i'm quite fond of "social constructivist" history
of thought and methodology of the Mirowski, Weintraub, Resnick and
Wolff type (although I wish the Rethinking Marxism crowd had more
of a clear cut positive agenda).
3) To switch gears, I think the "post-Walrasian" move that includes
Bowles and Gintis, as well as Akerlof, Stiglitz types both
increases our understanding of the economy and weakens the
conservative implications of the discipline, although I also
agree that it misses esential features that are hard to
formalize (of a power and class nature - power as the short-side
of the market seems insufficient).
4) My personal interest in the productivity slowdown makes me
an avid reader of Abramovitz and the Stanford economic history
group, as well as Social Structure of Accumulation / Regulation
School / Economic Geography discussions of growth theory, increasing
returns, fordism/postfordism literatures.

I'll leave it at that partial list for now, but let me add that
I think there is no shortage of interesting bodies of work to
follow, both in econ and out.  However, the state of public
discourse, by academics, politicians, and in the media, is
depressing as hell.  Watching Michigan's election season,
all i hear refers to crime and taxes.  Watching Paul Krugman,
who's theoretical work is often interesting enough, attack
"competitiveness" theory (itself admittedly problematic) in
the name of mutually beneficial trade, makes me return to
Marx and a fairly simple notion of ideology.
Last paragraph: I've recently discovered Manual Castells,
The Informational City, which I think both very interesting
and strangely uneven.  Anyone else know his work?  Any responses
to it in the literature?  He's also got an article in The Global
Economy in the Information Age and an article in New Left
Review 204.  Berkeley geographer / industrial planner associated
with BRIE (Tyson, Cohen, et al).
In the spirit of open-ended discourse,
Adam Lutzker
Visiting Instructor
Dept of Econ
Albion college, Mi