Re: Article in the Chronicle of Higher Education

["John T. Harvey" <j.harvey@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Mat, that's precisely what I was thinking.  Indeed, a multi-pronged approach
is called for.  ICAPE isn't the only game in town, and nor should it be.

And your statement here is dead on:
"I take this to be one of the purposes of ICAPE and its conference--to
promote collaboration and dialogue toward common goals: making room for
alternatives within the discipline, developing constructive analyses of the
real economy, and forging effective policies."

Though the events at Notre Dame are disheartening, it is certainly serving
to highlight just exactly what ICAPE was created to prevent.  Let's hope the
conference is a step in the right direction.

John

John T. Harvey
Professor of Economics
Department of Economics
Texas Christian University
Fort Worth, TX 76129
(817)257-7230  office
(817)924-9016  home
http://www.econ.tcu.edu/harvey.html
http://www.icape.org
----- Original Message -----
From: "Forstater, Mathew" <ForstaterM@xxxxxxxx>
To: "Henry C.K. Liu" <hliu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: <pkt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, January 24, 2003 10:19 AM
Subject: Re: Article in the Chronicle of Higher Education


> Paul can speak for himself, of course, but since he has done so
> previously, I imagine he is referring to his tactic of emphasizing the
> (related issues of) number of axioms, ergodicity versus non-ergodicity,
> and generality (general versus special in Keynes's sense).
>
> My own feeling is that a multi-pronged approach is called for, meaning
> that we need to challenge the mainstream in multiple ways. Paul's
> approach is important, but we need to fashion a variety of internal and
> external critiques, challenging them on their own grounds, as well as
> challenging the grounds themselves.  We also need to fashion alternative
> approaches, and here I think that we need to both develop specific
> alternative paradigms (Post Keynesian, Institutionalist, Marxist,
> Austrian, etc.) as well as to work on a variety of hybrid or eclectic
> approaches that draw on multiple alternative traditions.  Of course,
> every person doesn't have to do all of these--there can be some division
> of labor.  But while open, critical dialogue between alternatives is
> healthy and can contribute to 'progress', in-fighting and intolerance is
> generally not.  I take this to be one of the purposes of ICAPE and its
> conference--to promote collaboration and dialogue toward common goals:
> making room for alternatives within the discipline, developing
> constructive analyses of the real economy, and forging effective
> policies.
>
> mat
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Henry C.K. Liu [mailto:hliu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Thursday, January 23, 2003 3:40 PM
> To: pkt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: Article in the Chronicle of Higher Education
>
>
>
> pdavidso wrote:
>
> >Annual Meeting the AALS Section on Socio-Economics went very well.
> Jamie was a
> >big hit. In case you did not see it, I thought this article appearing
> in the
> >Chronicle of Higher Education might interest you. Steve Keen and Neva
> Goodwin
> >(who were among the economists featured in our program) are quoted and
> cited.
> >With best wishes and highest regard Robert Ashford College of Law
> Syracuse
> >Univ
> >
> >
> >Thanks for the information.  I saw the article in the CHRONICLE-- but
> in my
> >view the heterdox people are arguing the wrong argument -- and make it
> easy
> >for the mainstream to ignore them.
> >
> >Paul
> >
>
> Paul,
>
> Can you elaborate?
>
> Henry
>
>