LISTSERV - SHOE Archives - LISTSERV.YORKU.CA

SHOE Archives

Societies for the History of Economics

SHOE@YORKU.CA

	LISTSERV Archives
	SHOE Home

	Log In
	Register

	Subscribe or Unsubscribe

	Search Archives

Options:	Use Forum View Use Monospaced Font Show Text Part by Default Condense Mail Headers
Message:	[<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic:	[<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author:	[<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Subject:	HES: Re: Steroidal Neoclassicism
From:	[log in to unmask] (Peter J Boettke)
Date:	Tue Dec 26 10:47:39 2006
In-Reply-To:	<[log in to unmask]>
Message-ID:	<[log in to unmask]>
References:	<[log in to unmask]> <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:	text/plain (13 lines)

Alan,  
  
I suggest you look at the "debate" within Austrian economics between Robert Nozick (who
wrote an article on Austrian method) and Ludwig Lachmann (who choose to defend the
Austrian method).  Lachamm (like Donald Davidson) focused his response to Nozick's
critique of Austrian method on the appropriate level of analysis and discusses how it all
about "meaning".
  
You can read about this in the Austrian Economics Newsletter (Vol. 1, #1, 1977).  
  
Pete Boettke

ATOM RSS1 RSS2

LISTSERV.YORKU.CA