==================== 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.htmhttp://web.nchulc.edu.tw/~gunning/pat/welcome
============ FOOTER TO HES POSTING ============
For information, send the message "info HES" to [log in to unmask]