----------------- HES POSTING ----------------- Roy Weintraub's position, I take it, is that work which does in economics the sort of thing that political theorists do in political science is illegitimate. Suppose, as a student, Axel Leijonhufvud had proposed the substance of *On Keynesian Economics and The Economics of Keynes* as a dissertation topic at Duke. Since it qualifies neither as history nor as economics by Weintraub's criteria, too bad for Axel. He'd be directed either toward some mindless time-series macro or told to go rummage through Keynes' letters and apply to the history department. The sort of thing he does in OKEATEK is, for Weintraub, nothing at all - instead of what it is, a brilliant piece of economic thought. Weintraub's criteria are self-stultifying. Unfortunately, they are widely shared. Kevin Quinn ------------ FOOTER TO HES POSTING ------------ For information, send the message "info HES" to [log in to unmask]