When I first read Pat Gunning's attempt to answer the question he posed:   
  "Why are economists individualists?"  I thought, what an odd question?   
  If economists were individualists, why would Larry Moss write in   
defense of "individualism"?  Anthony Waterman's post then took the   
discussion to the realm of method, and it invited contributions on the   
merits and demerits of methodological individualism (MI) as well as who   
are the best practitioners of that method.  I then felt some relief for   
not having entered the discussion with the statement that, checking the   
list of Nobel Prize winners in economic science, we can find   
"individualists" and "collectivists" in their policy inclination.  Thus   
Pat's presumption the economists are individualists is evidently false.   
  Perhaps he would like to see all economists become individualists, but   
he failed to express himself clearly.  
  
Pat's latest post in defense of his earlier claim, in which he again   
asserts that "the reason why the greatest economists have studied   
economics ... was to make judgments about market intervention (and the   
supreme intervention - socialism. To do this they had to explain   
relative prosperity. Explaining this social phenomenon was undoubtedly a   
means of achieving their main goal. But it was not the main goal and,   
therefore, did not drive the method," takes me back to my initial   
interpretation of his original post.  So I say the obvious: Most   
economists are not individualists in their policy orientation, even when   
the are able to employ the individualists method of explaining   
occurrences in the marketplace.  
  
In the book, _Two Lucky People_, Rose Friedman talks about a debate   
she's had with her husband, Milton, on why some economists are   
collectivists.  Is it because they don't understand the analytical   
method of economics or is it because their ideological preferences   
override their understanding of the method of economic analysis?  I   
don't get the impression that they have reached a conclusion over this   
question.  Pat might want to think about that question rather than   
continuing to believe that (all) economists are individualists.  George   
Stigler's essay, "The Intellectual and the Market Place," might be a   
good starting point in trying to understand the phenomenon.  
  
James Ahiakpor