I agree with Harro, which is why in my own own work I often happily draw comparison between 17th-18th century debates and those of the 20th.

But I agree with Collander that there was a vision/image of economics prevalent around Marschall and Cambridge (J.N. Keynes) that insisted on some such split (of course, the younger  Keynes was at Versailles, underscoring Harro's point), and that we can understand post WWII economic developments as removing that image.

Sent from my iPad
Eric Schliesser 
BOF Research Professor, Philosophy and Moral Sciences, Ghent University, Blandijnberg 2, Ghent, B-9000, Belgium. Phone: (31)-(0)6-15005958
http://www.newappsblog.com/
http://coffeespotamsterdam.blogspot.com/
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/cf_dev/AbsByAuth.cfm?per_id=649484
http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/perl/user_eprints?userid=3158
http://philpapers.org/autosense.pl?searchStr=Eric%20Schliesser


On May 13, 2011, at 18:20, Harro Maas <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

Eric Schliesser wrote: 'Second, we don't understand post WWII economics, if we fail to see that the blurring between economics and statesmanship was deliberate'
 
I am not sure the label 'statesman' captures the intended role of the economist so well. As Colander uses it, it seems to be about the 'art' not the 'science' of economics ('capturing non-economic issues), but in my view this distinction never made much sense. One of the roles that Al Roth, I think in a paper in JHET or JEM long time ago - I don't have it at hand, attributed to economists 'wispering to princess' (or counceling as Eric Schliesser wrote) nicely shows the line was always blurred: Mun or Quesnay, not to speak of the political radicals around Bentham, or, of course, Keynes or Samuelson, were as much wispering to princess as Mankiw, Vernon Smith, or Krugman. Burried in discussions about methodology is what the whispering should be about and what kind of whispering is most effective to get your way of seeing things through. So I don't think the roles are new so much, but they stand in for the different visions (opinions, ideologies) of how the
 world should look like. Which brings us back to Friedman's/the Chicago boys shock doctrine for Chile.   
Harro maas