Yep. This is recycled polemics that doesn't hit any strategic targets. On Sat, Nov 15, 2014 at 11:01 AM, Eugene Coyle <[email protected]> wrote:
> This was a sloppy piece of work. > > e,g. this sentence: > > > > For example, a group of French > > graduate students in economics recently wrote an open letter, akin to a > > manifesto, critical of their academic education in economics as > > “autistic” and “pathologically distant from the problems of real markets > > and real people”: > > RECENTLY? That was about 15 years ago. The writer footnoted that to > someone else. > And he implies that William Vickery is still alive. Guess he missed the > obit, also years ago. > > Seems like a google search article. Counterpunch should do better than > this. > > Gene > > > > On Nov 14, 2014, at 2:17 PM, Louis Proyect <[email protected]> wrote: > > > There is now a widespread consensus that mainstream/neoclassical > > economists failed miserably to either predict the coming of the 2008 > > financial implosion, or provide a reasonable explanation when it > > actually arrived. Not surprisingly, many critics have argued that > > neoclassical economics has created more confusion than clarification, > > more obfuscation than elucidation. Economic “science” has, indeed, > > become “an ideological construct which serves to camouflage and justify > > the New World Order” [1]. > > > > Also not surprisingly, an increasing number of students who take classes > > and/or major in economics are complaining about the abstract and > > irrelevant nature of the discipline. For example, a group of French > > graduate students in economics recently wrote an open letter, akin to a > > manifesto, critical of their academic education in economics as > > “autistic” and “pathologically distant from the problems of real markets > > and real people”: > > > > “We wish to escape from imaginary worlds! Most of us have chosen to > > study economics so as to acquire a deep understanding of the economic > > phenomena with which the citizens of today are confronted. But the > > teaching that is offered . . . does not generally answer this > > expectation. . . . This gap in the teaching, this disregard for concrete > > realities, poses an enormous problem for those who would like to render > > themselves useful to economic and social actors” [2]. > > > > The word “autistic” may be offensive and politically incorrect, but it > > certainly provides an apt description of mainstream economics. > > > > full: > > > http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/11/14/class-interests-as-economic-theory/ > > _______________________________________________ > > pen-l mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l > > _______________________________________________ > pen-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l > -- Cheers, Tom Walker (Sandwichman)
_______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
