Pat Gunning wrote:   
> Why are economists individualists?   
  
  
There is an antecedent question:  
*are* economists individualists?  
  
I will not worry for now about the fact  
that the term "individualism" has gone  
undefined in this discussion.  For on  
any definition I can imagine being offered,  
the neoclassical theory of the firm  
presents itself immediately as strong  
evidence that some economists are surely  
not individualists.  
  
Of course, Pat rejects the neoclassical theory  
of the firm, based apparently on his individualism.  
In addition, Pat might point to more modern  
theories of the firm as evidence that economists  
have slowly responded to Blaug's critique of  
the neoclassical profit maximizing firm---becoming,  
shall we say, more individualist.  
  
But then there is the literature on how the structure  
of institutions is more important to outcomes  
than the characteristics of persons participating  
in those institutions.  Perhaps economists are  
becoming more individualist and less individualist  
simultaneously.  I assume Pat's individualism, whatever  
else it implies for economic reasoning, must imply  
he will have no trouble with the idea that the aggregate   
denoted by 'economists' might encompass such contrary   
developments.  
  
Cheers,  
Alan Isaac