Brad, I know, and have worked with, a lot of Ph.D.'s Most are very good, technically, in their fields, but few of them would be able to meet the criteria you have set out. I have also known other people who are not Ph.D.'s, but who would probably come close to meeting your criteria. One of my mentors, with whom I worked in my thirties, had the equivalent of a grade school education, but had an incredible ability to see through, and explain, how people organized themselves and why they did so. Another person, a friend I run into every once in a while, is now in his late eighties. I believe he finished the equivalent of high school, but never went to university. Nevertheless, he became scientific advisor to the Canadian Minister of Northern Affairs and wrote books on navigation. He was a pioneer arctic aviator. There are others, un Ph.D'd, that would fit your criteria but I won't go into that for the time being.
My quarrel with what Keith wrote is that it seemed to deny the effort that each generation has had to put into framing its own understanding of the changing world. The Classical economists put forward their understanding of their world. Though Marx would not have agreed, that understanding may have been appropriate for their time. Current practitioners of the dismal science have to try to understand and explain a very different world, and perhaps a much more complex one. In response to one of my previous postings, Ray Evans Harrell suggested that the difference may be similar to that between Newtonian and quantum physics. That may indeed be a valid analogy. One could argue that the Classicists focused on immutable aspects of human behaviour whereas modern economists have come to recognize that very little in the human experience is immutable and a great deal of it is uncertain and unpredictable. A lot of what the Classicists thought is still relevant today, but to try to explain the economic behaviour of the current and emerging world in purely Classical terms would provide only a very partial explanation. There are economists around today that are every bit as valid as the Classicists, but they have to think differently from them because the world has become a very different place. Regards, Ed Ed Weick 577 Melbourne Ave. Ottawa, ON, K2A 1W7 Canada Phone (613) 728 4630 Fax (613) 728 9382 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Brad McCormick, Ed.D." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Ed Weick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "Ray Evans Harrell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Keith Hudson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2002 10:04 PM Subject: Re: Lucky Duckies > Ed Weick wrote: > > Keith: > > > > > >>Indeed, in my view, most present-day "economists" are not economists at > >>all, but only econometricists. They attempt to describe and measure the > >>economy but not to understand it in any fundamental way. All the > >>"economists" we can think of during, roughly, the last century have been > >>either econometricists or economic journalists of greater or lesser > >>brilliance, and have given insights of greater or lesser relevance. None > > > > of > > > >>them actually got to the root of the matter, least of all Keynes who was > >>merely a Bloomsbury, quasi-Fabian elitist. > >> > >>For real economists, we still have to go back to the geniuses of the > >>subject, to those who grappled with economics within the context of the > >>other big issues of the human condition -- of demographics, politics, > >>trade, disease, cultural differences and so on. They were polymaths more > >>than merely economists. We have to skip over many "economists" of the last > >>century who dwelt on, and burnished, one or two facets of the subject and > >>go back to Marx, Ricardo, Malthus, Smith, Say . . . all the way to > >>Aristotle (though there must have been a few before him who have gone > >>unrecorded). Even though some of the true economists of the past may have > >>gone wildly wrongly -- wholly or partially -- it is only these, with both > > > > a > > > >>wide and deep view of economics within the whole field of human activity > >>who can be called true economists. > > > > > > Keith, I have a lot of respect for you, but when I read crap like this, it > > begins to wane pretty quickly! > > > > Ed > > > > > > > > Keith's definition of real economists as more > than mere economists seems to fit in with my definition of a > PhD: > > A PhD should attest that the recipient > has demonstrated love (phil) of wisdom (sophia), > with particular attention to the application of wisdom > to a certain discipline, and concurrently with > concern for the application of that discipline to > the cultivation of wisdom generally. This concern > should manifest itself, among other ways, > as passion for teaching and/or > healing (doctor), facilitated especially through > the means provided by said discipline. > > Mere technical mastery > of a disciplinary field, should be certified > by a MA or MS degree. Such persons should be > permitted to practice what they know how to do but do not > know what to do with, only under supervision of > PhD level persons (see above). > > Professors, in addition to the criteria for PhD, > should also PROFESS wisdom, i.e., effectively publicly speak > for the common good, in particular, speaking out > for truth that either does not yet have a voice > or whose voice has been silenced. > > Those who cannot meet such criteria can acquit > themselves honorably by acknowledging their > limitations and not pretending to be more than > they are. Indeed, since there is no person > whose abilities and powers are unbounded, > this is a virtue which Everyman can practice. > > And, finally, I have learned from some unintending > teachers, that: > > No person can rise so high > that they cannot reach a hand down > to help another person up. > > \brad mccormick > > -- > Let your light so shine before men, > that they may see your good works.... (Matt 5:16) > > Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. (1 Thes 5:21) > > <![%THINK;[SGML+APL]]> Brad McCormick, Ed.D. / [EMAIL PROTECTED] > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > Visit my website ==> http://www.users.cloud9.net/~bradmcc/ >
