Pat Gunning wrote: > Why are economists individualists? There is an antecedent question: *are* economists individualists? I will not worry for now about the fact that the term "individualism" has gone undefined in this discussion. For on any definition I can imagine being offered, the neoclassical theory of the firm presents itself immediately as strong evidence that some economists are surely not individualists. Of course, Pat rejects the neoclassical theory of the firm, based apparently on his individualism. In addition, Pat might point to more modern theories of the firm as evidence that economists have slowly responded to Blaug's critique of the neoclassical profit maximizing firm---becoming, shall we say, more individualist. But then there is the literature on how the structure of institutions is more important to outcomes than the characteristics of persons participating in those institutions. Perhaps economists are becoming more individualist and less individualist simultaneously. I assume Pat's individualism, whatever else it implies for economic reasoning, must imply he will have no trouble with the idea that the aggregate denoted by 'economists' might encompass such contrary developments. Cheers, Alan Isaac