----------------- HES POSTING ----------------- 
I am quite fascinated by the comments of Professors Colander and Weintraub regarding
graduate students and graduate schools in the US for two reasons.  First, if Duke is a
reasonable proxy for the top economics graduate schools in the US, then it would seem that
the top economics graduate departments require or demand that their students believe only
in mainstream theory and should not(or be prohibited from) engaging  with heterodox
economic ideas and subject matter (or just plain having doubts about mainstream theory).
Such a situation is, it can be argued, anti-intellectual, anti-scholarship, and closed
minded.  In fact, is this situation really any different from fundamentalist religion
camps that have trained believers to be true believers?  Like the religious true
believers, graduates from the top graduate schools are trained (indoctrinated) to
proselytize as teachers and scholars (?).  In a sub-discipline such as the history of
economics/economic thought, the subject cannot be pre-chosen by the scholar; thus to
exclude part of it from learning and scholarship for ideological (religious?) reasons
would seem to violate everything the HES stands for.  Secondly, confronted by such anti-
intellectualism, taking a highly critical and confrontation stance towards the mainstream
may be the only honorable recourse a scholar and his/her department has.  To fight against
anti-intellectualism and intellectual bigotry and to fight for open minded scholarship is
never a mistake, even if the results are bloodied noses, destroyed careers, and ostracism
from the mainstream economics profession.
 
Fred Lee 
 
 
------------ FOOTER TO HES POSTING ------------ 
For information, send the message "info HES" to [log in to unmask]