On 12/9/95, Brad De Long wrote: 
 
>it is far from clear to me that postmodern cultural studies 
>has anything to contribute or is the right language in which 
>to try to think about conceptual frameworks helpful for 
>analyzing post-industrial economies. 
 
In response, I would offer Brad's own response to Greg 
Ransom on 12/3/95:  Argument?  Citations?  
Even....evidence? 
 
I agree with Brad that the "post-industrial (economies)...are 
harder to express in my native tongue--modern economics." 
That is why I explore some of these approaches from 
outside of the discipline.  It is clear that these approaches do 
not hold all, if any, answers for economics.  But it is possible 
that by exploring them new interesting avenues of research 
may arise, new topics of debate may be created, or old 
topics may become revitalized due to new perspectives.  
Even with these philosophical sidetrips, I still manage to do 
work on the "real world." 
  
Also, to respond to the "epistemoi," as you call them, that 
you propose as determinants of social consciousness, I 
would offer your own counsel to Robin Neill on 12/7 
concerning a possible epistemological break between 
Cantillon, Smith and Mill.  That is, that your  "epistemoi" are 
"mainly a matter of one's taste and purpose."  On this 
matter, you and Foucault are in agreement. 
 
Jonathon E. Mote 
1822 Chestnut #3F 
Philadelphia, PA  19103 
[log in to unmask]