Re: History and Evolution

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