Posted by Will Thomas in Commentary Track, History of Economic Thought.
Tags: Beatrice Cherrier, Deidre McCloskey, E. Roy Weintraub, James Poterba, Mary Morgan, Pedro Duarte, Peter Temin, Philip Mirowski, Roger Backhouse, S. M. Amadae, Wade Hands, Yann Giraud

Paul Samuelson (1915–2009), doyen of MIT economics
I have a new article out, “Decisions and Dynamics: Postwar Theoretical Problems and the MIT Style of Economics,” in the 2014 annual supplement to History of Political Economy on MIT and the Transformation of American Economics. Following tradition, I’ll talk a little bit about the thinking behind the article in a separate post. However, I would like to start with a few words about the 2013 conference that the supplement was based on.
In short, it was almost certainly the best conference I have attended. To understand why, it will be useful to understand the peculiarities of the development of the field of the history of economic thought (HET), and how it seems to be reaching a new state of maturity.
For some time now HET has been having something of an identity crisis. Traditionally strongly affiliated with economics departments, HET, even more so than economic history, has had problems maintaining its status within the economics profession. Concurrently, HET has moved away methodologically from exegesis on the economic canon (“What did Smith/Keynes mean when they wrote X?”), and more toward something people working in the history of science would be familiar and comfortable with.
(more…)
The “MIT and the Transformation of American Economics” Conference and Maturation in the the Historiography of Economic Thought December 29, 2014
Posted by Will Thomas in Commentary Track, History of Economic Thought.Tags: Beatrice Cherrier, Deidre McCloskey, E. Roy Weintraub, James Poterba, Mary Morgan, Pedro Duarte, Peter Temin, Philip Mirowski, Roger Backhouse, S. M. Amadae, Wade Hands, Yann Giraud
10 comments
Paul Samuelson (1915–2009), doyen of MIT economics
I have a new article out, “Decisions and Dynamics: Postwar Theoretical Problems and the MIT Style of Economics,” in the 2014 annual supplement to History of Political Economy on MIT and the Transformation of American Economics. Following tradition, I’ll talk a little bit about the thinking behind the article in a separate post. However, I would like to start with a few words about the 2013 conference that the supplement was based on.
In short, it was almost certainly the best conference I have attended. To understand why, it will be useful to understand the peculiarities of the development of the field of the history of economic thought (HET), and how it seems to be reaching a new state of maturity.
For some time now HET has been having something of an identity crisis. Traditionally strongly affiliated with economics departments, HET, even more so than economic history, has had problems maintaining its status within the economics profession. Concurrently, HET has moved away methodologically from exegesis on the economic canon (“What did Smith/Keynes mean when they wrote X?”), and more toward something people working in the history of science would be familiar and comfortable with.
(more…)