================= HES POSTING ================= > Ross: > > Could you explain how you would be better placed as an economic historian > rather than an economist to illuminate contemporary policy issues and > analytical developments. . . . My > "subversive function" could not be performed by historians, only by > economists. > > Robert Leeson Robert: My response to how I as an historian of economics am "better placed . . . to illuminate contemporary policy issues" than an economist would be the same as the response of any intellectual historian; that is to say, I am not "better placed," simply differently placed. While the economist may want to provide alternative solutions to particular issues, my only real "policy-oriented" interest is this: why is it that in the twentieth century modern society came to rely on economic science for "solutions" to social issues? Or put better: why is it that modern society framed its "issues" in ways amenable to being addressed by the social sciences? Or again: what is it about modern society that elevates "science" and thereby economics to the status previously given to the priesthood? Similarly, my response with regards to analytical developments is not that the historian of economics is "better" placed than the economist, rather simply differently placed. I am all in favor of multiple rational reconstructions by economists of earlier economic ideas. I write historical reconstructions, that's all. I would hope that if I write well, economists will read my historical reconstructions and possibly construct better rational reconstructions. But I write historical reconstructions to do history, not to improve economics. Ross Ross B. Emmett Editor, HES and Co-manager CIRLA-L Augustana University College Camrose, Alberta CANADA T4V 2R3 voice: (403) 679-1517 fax: (403) 679-1129 e-mail: [log in to unmask] or [log in to unmask] URL: http://www.augustana.ab.ca/~emmettr ============ FOOTER TO HES POSTING ============ For information, send the message "info HES" to [log in to unmask]