Bruce Caldwell has some interesting comments--with which I am very much in agreement--regarding the demise of the mainstream economic curriculum (both graduate and undergraduate) in regards to the teaching (or the lack thereof) of history of economic thought. Given that graduate programs regularly churn out mathematicians and statisticians masquerading as economists, I think Bruce's comments aught to be given considerable thought, and hopefully considerable action.
By the way, I am not attempting to argue that I am as well educated in history of thought as I would like to be. In fact, I view myself as a product of the system that Bruce describes--I had no history of thought course in either my undergraduate or graduate program, leading to a what I view as a deficiency in my education, something I must continually work to improve.
HT: Munger at Division of Labour
Posts
