================= HES POSTING ================= Greetings, Since I introduced the term "agenda" into the discussion of Stigler, let me explain what I had in mind. The hint I offered was that Stigler, and others in the "Chicago" school of industrial organization, have in mind a laissez-faire attitude toward the economy in general, and toward industrial structure and conduct in particular. This is at least the case for Stigler, whom I have encountered most often in the IO field. Again, this is my impression, as a non-expert in history of thought. It seems to me that he is akin to libertarians in seeking a minimalist government. What's wrong with that? Well, nothing, I suppose--unless one lets that political agenda unduly influence the selection of a research methodology and/or results in order to confirm the validity of the agenda. I suppose this raises questions about whether knowledge is value-free (I seriously doubt that it is), or about the accuracy of the description of what passes for "scientific process" (and I doubt that, too). Mary Schweitzer's posting on the sociology of knowledge, and embedding Stigler and Chicago within the time in which they wrote, seems to me to be interesting--but, again, this sort of research is outside my field. In this context, it might be worthwhile to consider whether someone with such an overt political agenda could advance economic "science" enough to deserve a Nobel prize. Without denigrating Stigler the man or researcher (never met him, only read some articles for dissertation and other research), the issue troubles me. The fact that many "Chicago" economists have recently won Nobel prizes is an interesting phenomenon. I teach at a small liberal arts college--I'm the only economist here. I occasionally bump into natural science folks, who give me static about how economics has a much smaller reality check than their disciplines. Economists can theorize forever, and win rewards for it, without ever having their work checked for validity by empirical evidence --they say. I try to tell these colleagues that this isn't completely true, that economics does have reality checks. But "Chicago" economists seem to defy my statement. Most annoying. John Dodge ============ FOOTER TO HES POSTING ============ For information, send the message "info HES" to [log in to unmask]