< < <
Date Index > > > |
Re: History and Evolution by Bruce R. McFarling 19 July 2002 05:30 UTC |
< < <
Thread Index > > > |
At 08:57 18/07/02 -0400, Nemonemini@aol.com wrote: > Popper contacts this issue when he speaks of the Oedipus Effect, p. 16 of >Poverty of Historicism, when he discusses the way what Oedipus thought the >future was influenced how the future happened. > Marx touches the issue when he says, in effect, this 'theory' of the >economists is pervaded by ideology, i.e. the 'law' of economies' contains a >'it has to be this way, that's science'. Also note Veblen in "Why Economics is not an Evolutionary Science." Here, the yardstick proposed for being a (turn of the last century) "modern" science was that the theory be capable of evolution, and the neoclassical economics of the time was found wanting (just as the mainstream economics of today was found wanting by the French students that rose up against "Autistic Economics". Virtually, Bruce McFarling, Newcastle, NSW ecbm@cc.newcastle.edu.au
< < <
Date Index > > > |
World Systems Network List Archives at CSF | Subscribe to World Systems Network |
< < <
Thread Index > > > |