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
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date:
Mon, 14 Nov 2011 22:31:50 -0500
Reply-To:
Societies for the History of Economics <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
Re: Backhouse and Bateman, "Wanted: Worldly Philosophers"
From:
Sumitra Shah <[log in to unmask]>
MIME-Version:
1.0
In-Reply-To:
<[log in to unmask]>
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
quoted-printable
Sender:
Societies for the History of Economics <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (11 lines) 
This late in the debate, I can only think of posting a discussion about the worldly philosophers in NYT in 1999. Robert Heilbroner and others have much to say in the article titled:

"A Challenge to Scientific Economics; An Older School Looks at a Broad, More Intuitive Picture While Modernists See Just the Numbers and Facts"

http://www.nytimes.com/1999/01/23/arts/challenge-scientific-economics-older-school-looks-broad-more-intuitive-picture.html?

Thank you all for a most interesting discussion.

Sumitra Shah

,

ATOM RSS1 RSS2