On Fri, 12 Dec 1997, James Devine wrote: * * * > Lately, I've been wondering about the social-psychological basis of these > claims of "superiority." Why make this kind of outrageous claim at all? Is > it because we're working at a liberal arts college and have to rub shoulders > with all sorts of theologians, social scientists, etc.? does our > department's status at the bottom of this University's hierarchy invoke > feelings of inferiority that encourage such assertions? But I feel that > economists as a profession feel superior to non-economists. * * * > any thoughts? William Jay Gould in "The Mismeasure of Man" argues that this tendency to quantify and rank human beings, with the instrument for measurement being defined to the measurer's advantage and measuree's disadvantage, is a persistent feature of at least European thought. And it seems to me that lawyers are patently superior. After all, our standard of analysis is so complex, all embracing, and difficult to penetrate for the uninitiated (more work for lawyers is our mantrum) that it defies quantification. Plus we have the best jargon. Quasi in rem jurisdiction anyone? Ellen J. Dannin California Western School of Law 225 Cedar Street San Diego, CA 92101 Phone: 619-525-1449 Fax: 619-696-9999
Re: the superiority of economics ...
Ellen Dannin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Fri, 12 Dec 1997 10:41:41 -0800 ()
- the superiority of economics ... James Devine
- Re: the superiority of economi... Ellen Dannin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
- Re: the superiority of economi... Samuel G. Pooley
- Re: the superiority of economi... Wojtek Sokolowski
- Re: the superiority of economi... Tom Walker
- Re: the superiority of economi... James Devine
- Re: the superiority of economi... Jay Hecht
- Re: the superiority of economi... Wojtek Sokolowski