I have been much preoccupied recently with a study of how Karl Popper might
be charged with creating a false version of the ancient political economy
which conforms with the ideology of Hayek, whilst Moses Finley might at
least equally be charged with distorting the ancient political economy to
favour a fundamental position adopted by Keynes.

Very difficult ethical matters of profound sorts of bias, but matters I feel
ought to take precedence over say academic plagiarism in a general overview
of ethics in an undergrad course.

Apparently like John Womack, my thoughts turned to the where one might chose
to start the first lecture.  I would be unhappy with the choice of
Aristotle.  Karl Polanyi of course did found economic thought on Aristotle,
but I feel neither Polanyi nor Aristotle are sufficiently free of partisan
stain.

I do not teach, and have no plans to.  But if I were notionally to chose an
ancient fundamental position, (for use in some ideal world), I guess it
would be the tale of Diogenes and the candle.  But actually, I think I would
turn to my hero of the early enlightenment, John Arbuthnot.  Aside from his
work in fiction and mathematics (and as Newton’s doctor), Arbuthnot wrote a
forgotten work pioneering the quantification of economic aspects of history.
 He also wrote a summary of a satirical work on the nature of political
lies.  That is where I would (notionally) start: 

John Arbuthnot (1713), concerning “The Art of convincing the People of
Salutary Falsehoods, for some good End”:

“People have a Right to private Truth from their Neighbours, and oeconomical
Truth from their own Family......but...they have no Right at all to
Political Truth:.......People may as well all pretend to be Lords of Mannors
and possess great Estates, as to have Truth told them in Matters of
Government. The Author, with great Judgment, states the several Shares of
Mankind in this Matter of Truth, according to their several Capacities,
Dignities, and Professions; and shews you, that Children have hardly any
share at all; in consequence of which, they have very seldom any Truth told
them.”

(PROPOSALS For PRINTING A very Curious Discourse, A TREATISE of the ART OF
Political Lying, WITH An ABSTRACT of the First Volume of the said TREATISE.)