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] (Pack, Spencer J.)
Date:
Fri Sep 7 11:39:43 2007
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (25 lines)
Here is the letter I sent yesterday in support of our colleagues down under.

Spencer Pack


________________________________

From: Pack, Spencer J.Sent: Thu 9/6/2007 12:50 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: history of economic thought



Dear Dr. Brett:

     Please add my name to Sandra Peart's letter. I consider the history of economic thought (or theory) to be part of economics, just as the history of philosophy is part of philosophy, and the history of political theory is part of political theory. There are, in fact, various approaches to the study of the history of economic thought. However, it seems to me that to do it well, you really need to know and practice contemporary, as well as past economic theory. Contemporary economic theory can and should inform our knowledge and understanding of past economic theory; and past economic theory can and should inform our understanding of contemporary economic theory. Hence, the history of economic thought should, in my opinion, be classified as economics.


Sincerely yours,

Spencer J. Pack, Professor of Economics
Connecticut College, New London, CT. USA



ATOM RSS1 RSS2