It appears to be an obvious presupposition of the framing of the
conference under discussion that abortion is morally unproblematic.

In my view, the historical economic work alluded to in its description
reflects deeply "economistic" tendency to infer policy claims, imbued with
a particular moral position, from economic premises. Here is a *non
sequitur* ... unless one assumes moral consequentialist premises.

In the history of economics, consequentialism has had significant sway. But
so too are there highly developed alternative views in the history of
ethics, with inevitable entailments for economic thought. Start --just for
example -- with such sophisticated philosophers as Elizabeth Anscombe or
Alasdair MacIntyre.

One wonders what bylaws of the HES and what ideological orientation of the
masters program  mentioned in the conference's description lead to support
for a particular stance on so controverted a topic in the broader culture.
Is it the purview of an academic society or of an academic program, both of
which probably otherwise aspire officially to ideological neutrality ,to
take sides in such an issue?

One of the emails in this thread alludes to "conservative" sources of
funding. One could just as well trace sources of funding that are from a
much different direction. The history of those sources of funding, and
their influence on academic research, can be traced. Are sources of funding
dispositive of the truth of a matter?

Returning to the conference, will it address the disgraceful historical
eugenic roots of economic study of population policies that presupposes
abortion , including the sway of eugenic policies and their funding sources
within the history of economics?

My own view is that any econometric work that is used to undergird the
policy claims of this conference could just as well be used to undergird a
much different set of policies: the need to find policies to support
impoverished women and their families who affirm the intrinsic value of
life, including that of the unborn woman. There is already a huge network
of volunteer efforts to achieve these ends, unfortunately overlooked by
perhaps most economists, but also needed is robust discussion about social
policies to achieve these ends.

As well as a critique of the culturally colonialist sway of policies that
promote abortion.

The quest for truth about any topics proceeds by argument, counterargument,
argument, and then more counterargument. An intellectually diverse approach
to the study of the history of economics will include discussion about the
moral presuppositions of economic views, which cannot so easily be
suspended when it is convenient.

It is with considerable pain that I write above, enjoying as much as I do
this listserv.

Brian Simboli
(Views expressed above are mine and do not necessarily represent those of
my employer.)


On Tue, Dec 20, 2022 at 7:55 PM Humberto Barreto <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:

> I distributed Dan Hammond's message, even though it gave me pause, because
> he was responding to the conference announcement.
>
> Since then, I have received two messages rebutting Hammond, but I do not
> believe they are within the bounds of this list: the history of economic
> thought, broadly defined. Thus, I am not distributing those messages.
>
> I wanted to let everyone know this so you do not spend time composing a
> message that I do not distribute.
>
> I trust you understand my reasoning and I remain
>
> Your obedient moderator,
>
> Humberto Barreto
>


-- 

Need an overview of library research at Lehigh? See:


   - Tutorial: Library Research in the Sciences & Mathematics
<https://lehigh.libwizard.com/f/science_math_tutorials>
   - Tutorial: Library Research in Psychology
<https://lehigh.libwizard.com/f/psychology>

Brian Simboli
Science, Mathematics, and Psychology Librarian
Library and Technology Services
E.W. Fairchild Martindale
Lehigh University
8A East Packer Avenue
Bethlehem, PA 18015-3170
(610) 758-5003; [log in to unmask]; Profile
<https://libraryguides.lehigh.edu/prf.php?account_id=13461>