----------------- HES POSTING ----------------- 
Roy Weintraub's position, I take it, is that work which does in economics the sort of
thing that political theorists do in political science is illegitimate. Suppose, as  a
student,  Axel Leijonhufvud had proposed the substance of *On Keynesian Economics and The
Economics of Keynes*  as a dissertation topic at Duke. Since it qualifies neither as
history nor as economics by Weintraub's  criteria, too bad for Axel. He'd be directed
either toward some mindless time-series macro or told to go rummage through Keynes'
letters and apply to the history department.  The sort of thing he does in OKEATEK is, for
Weintraub, nothing at all - instead of  what it is, a brilliant piece of economic thought.
Weintraub's criteria are self-stultifying. Unfortunately, they are widely shared.
 
Kevin Quinn 
 
 
------------ FOOTER TO HES POSTING ------------ 
For information, send the message "info HES" to [log in to unmask]