----------------- HES POSTING ----------------- 
[This message is in response to Pete Boettke's contribution to the  
DISC theme on the Greatest Economist of the Millenium. Since it  
develops a new theme, I have chosen to provide a new DISC thread.-- 
RBE] 
 
Regarding Peter's comments about vision and analysis: 
 
I was under the impression that Schumpeter, who stressed the  
existence of vision in scientific endeavors, was also convinced that  
rules of scientific economic analysis will all but eliminate the dangers  
posed by vision turning into damging ideology.   
 
He writes in HISORY OF ECONOMIC ANALYSIS:"But we also  
observe that the rules of procedure that we apply in our analytic work  
are almost as much exempt from ideological influence as vision is  
subject to it. Pasionate allegiance and passionate hatred may indeed  
tamper with these rules. In themselves these rules, many of which,  
moreover, are imposed upon us by scientific practice in fields that are  
little or not at all affected by ideology, are pretty effective in showing  
up misuse. And, what is equally important, they tend to crush out  
ideologically conditioned error from the visions from which they start.  
It is their particular virtue, and they do so automatically and 
irrespective  
of the desires of the reseach worker."   
 
Scumpeter's faith in 'scientific' economic method was indeed very  
deep; his immense admiration for Walras was evidence of this.  
Heilbroner, on the other hand, has always maintained the difficulty of  
separating vision and analysis. In one of his articles on Schumpeter  
("Was Scumpeter Right"), he turns the light on Schumpeter himself to  
show how his economics was influenced by his vision/ideology.   
 
Sumitra Shah 
St. John's University 
 
------------ FOOTER TO HES POSTING ------------ 
For information, send the message "info HES" to [log in to unmask]