SHOE Archives

Societies for the History of Economics

SHOE@YORKU.CA

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 >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
[log in to unmask] (Prof.ssa Lilia Costabile)
Date:
Fri Mar 31 17:18:47 2006
In-Reply-To:
Message-ID:
<f05100301beb96847ada3@[39.6.40.41]>
References:
<[log in to unmask]> <010501c5606a$c2f0ad80$1a5cb382@MADRIGAL> <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (12 lines)
I think that Dennis Robertson had a very good answer to this   
question. Why teach the history of thought? Because: "highbrow   
opinion is like a hunted hare; if you stand long enough it will come   
back to the place it started from".  
  
In other words, history of thought may be useful in order to avoid   
"the attractive Anglo-Saxon kind of unnecessary originality" (which, in my view, is by no
means an exclusive character of the Anglo-Saxon culture).
  
Lilia Costabile  
 

ATOM RSS1 RSS2