SHOE Archives

Societies for the History of Economics

SHOE@YORKU.CA

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
[log in to unmask] (Samuel Bostaph)
Date:
Fri Mar 31 17:18:47 2006
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (22 lines)
You are wrong about osteopathy and about the fact of different teaching hospitals.
Perhaps your casual empiricism among acquaintances has left you misinformed.  It is true
that MDs are considered more prestigious by the general public, but osteopathy is a
distinct paradigm that has its adherents and practitioners  BTW, I have never been treated
by an osteopathic doctor so I am not engaging in any self-protective argumentation.  I
honestly don't know whether the MD paradigm of the mechanical person is more useful than
that of aiding the body's natural healing powers.
  
HOT is declining as a taught subject in graduate schools because of a combination of
intellectual laziness and mistaken arrogance on the part of economic mathterbationists
whose institutional dominance is one result of 100 years of AEA effort.  (See Bernstein's
masterful A PERILOUS PROGRESS for a history of the rise and fall of AEA influence in
policymaking.)  The total inability of the mainstream to either anticipate or explain the
recession of 2000 and its continuation through the present day is one symptom of its
theoretical irrelevance.  If it weren't for the socialized structure of the worldwide
educational system, there would be far fewer economists and far better economic theory in
journals than is the case in this era of the decline of the mainstream.
  
Sam Bostaph  
  
 

ATOM RSS1 RSS2