> So, I am reading THE PROMISE OF PRAGMATISM. 
>  
> What comes to mind is the following question.  With the advent of a 
> new epistemology and psychology, following the work of Pierce, James 
> and Dewey [the Pragmatists], T.B. Veblen called on economists to 
> abandon the old Associationist epistemology and psychology; that is, 
> to bring Economics into line with Pragmatism [in his phrase, make it 
> an evolutionary science].  Since 1950 (or whenever you wish to set the 
> date) Pragmatism has been replaced by [succeeded by, improved upon by, 
> has led into, has degenerated into] Postmodern Deconstructionism.  The 
> latter presents yet another [an alternative, an improved upon, a 
> contradictory] epistemology-psychology with which to speculate about 
> the problem of [the crisis of] knowledge.  Is anyone calling for an 
> updating of Economics on the basis of Postmodern Deconstructionism? 
> What is the significance of Economics' continued reliance on `the old 
> Associationist epistemology-psychology'?  Or, is there some other 
> question that should be asked with respect to this matter?  Is 
> positive, quantitative economics Pragmatic?  In what sense? 
>  
> [log in to unmask] 
>