Re: rounding up posses

On Mon, 20 Mar 2000 kjkhoo@pop.jaring.my wrote:

> At 10:30 AM +0800 19/3/00, Boris Stremlin wrote:
> >On Sat, 18 Mar 2000, Richard N Hutchinson wrote:
> >
> >> Personally I am in favor of focusing our disciplinary war
> >> against (mainstream) economics.
> >
> >Fair enough, but let's not apply a double standard (one can just as
> >easily
> >claim that, like it or not, the principles of market economics are
> >here to
> >stay and use this argument as a defence of "mainstream" economics as you
> >have used genetics in defence of sociobiology).
> 
> Sorry, I don't follow.
> 
> A claim that the principles of market economics are here to stay does
> not necessarily amount to a defence of "mainstream" economics, if by
> "mainstream" one means the neo-classical. There's that remarkable
> book by Stiglitz "Whither Socialism?", derived from what must indeed
> have been a remarkable lecture coming as it did in early 1990 shortly
> after the fall of the Wall when capitalist and market triumphalism
> was the rule. Stiglitz does indeed accept the principles of market
> economics, but he performs quite an attack on "mainstream" economics
> as an adequate description of the market.
> 
> Ditto, the fact of genetics, can hardly be taken as a defence of
> sociobiology.

I guess I really didn't say that right, since Richard didn't get it
either.  In fact, you just restated what I originally meant.  I was
attacking both the equation of sociobiology with genetics AND the equation
of market principles with neoclassical economics.  Hence my dismay when
Richard assumed that I was drawing a parallel between the latter and
genetics.

-- 
Boris Stremlin
bc70219@binghamton.edu