==================== HES POSTING ===================== 
 
For each of the last two years, there was a discussion on the HES list 
about what "economics" is. More recently, there was a discussion of what 
"neoclassical economics" is. In each case, there was no consensus. 
Indeed, unless I misunderstood the posts, most contributors seemed to 
feel uneasy about dealing with the issue. Nevertheless, some 
contributors seem to feel comfortable speaking of the "economics 
profession." 
 
How is it possible to write about the censorship of economic writers 
without first defining economics? Were Marx and Mises "censored" because 
they were wrong? Because they were not economists? Because they were not 
members of the profession? How do we decide? It is little wonder that 
this thread has generated so many diverse opinions. 
 
My two cents on Milton Friedman. It is hardly a sin to give advice to a 
dictator on how to help create the conditions for a free market economy. 
Nor is it a sin to advocate one's own views on the meaning of economics 
in public. And if it is a sin to make claims about the nature of the 
viewpoints held by the "economics profession," let he (she) who is 
without sin cast the first stone. 
 
--  
Pat Gunning 
http://www.showtower.com.tw/~gunning/welcome.htm 
http://web.nchulc.edu.tw/~gunning/pat/welcome 
 
============ FOOTER TO HES POSTING ============ 
For information, send the message "info HES" to [log in to unmask]