Hilarious! I'd already killfiled AdmrlLocke, so I hadn't read his first message. Love your answer though.
On Thu, 9 Jan 2003, John-Charles Bradbury wrote: > If you already know the correct answers better than the professor why are > you taking the class instead of teaching it? > > JC > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Thursday, January 09, 2003 7:41 AM > Subject: Re: News Coverage and bad economics > > > >Yes, indeed I was informed recently that I recieved an A- instead of an A > in > >one of my PhD courses because I include too much historical content in my > >exam answers. I suppose there's no better way to protect faulty theory > than > >to ignore the lessons of economic history. > > > >In a message dated 1/9/03 7:00:41 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > > ><< > > > >Fred Foldvary a *crit : > > > >> > >> one is a > >> better economist if one knows some law, history, geography, literature, > >> political science, and philosophy. And besides his specialty, a good > >> economist should know some history of thought, economic history, and > >> something about the various schools of thought besides his own. > > > >True, but what do students in economics study all that? Too much maths > >usually divert students from all these topics : they just don't need all > >these to pass their exams. > > > >begin:vcard > >n:Girard;Bernard >> > > > > > > > > >
