This blog is an experiment in real-time publication of homework and writing assignments for an Economics course at Duke University with Prof. Craufurd Goodwin.
The title of the blog is related to the course, which is named "The Uses of Economics". Essentially, since Economic notions are themselves economically significant, it is useful to reflexively analyze the impact of these notions and the way in which they impact human behavior. So for the purposes of the course, Prof. Goodwin has binned these economic discussions into 12 "styles", which are somewhat arbitrary, but will be used in discussions here.
Further explanation and introduction to the styles will be made available in future posts. I look forward to your comments and suggestions.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I disagree that economists believe economics is an objective science. In the neo-classical style of thought, yes, I concur with such an assertion; however, not all people, let alone all economists of today's world, adhere to such modes of thinking. Rather, when looking at the classical political style based on the conception that personal freedom leads to free trade which is the "most successful form of market operations," it appears that economic theories coincide with principles concerning humanity rather than science at all. While I did find the conversation between the Friedmans et al. to be very provocative and innovative, I am still unsure as to what your overall message was with that entry. It did a very good job to highlight competing and contrasting claims and their relationship to one another, but I am still unclear as to what that discussion added to the overall debate of the economic styles. Furthermore, to make such a broad claim that most economists think of economics as a science is too grandiose a claim to not be supported by direct evidence, or at least with the tagline of neo-classical economists. However, while it may seem that all the above comments are negative, they are merely a critique on the part which I found weakest in your paper. On the whole, I really enjoyed reading it. Your writing style is succinct, fresh, and clear. Although I have mentioned this previously, your ideas are creative and engaging. I look forward to reading more, and have merely added my two cents to the debate.
What would a principles course look like if designed by Aquinas, or by Milton Friedman, or by Bill Gates? A fascinating question. I especially liked the idea that Gates's course would be a story of information technology and national progress. Regarding the conversation the three students might have, why do you think the Aquinas student would be so quick to leave after being accused of knowing nothing about economics? Would the Gates and Friedman students resort to defending themselves by simply saying the Aquinas student knew no economics?
Paul D.
Post a Comment