Today the New York Times printed an obituary for Robert Heilbroner, an American economist who wrote “The Worldly Philosophers”, a sort of introductory book on the history of economic thought. One of my professors in grad school was a fan of this book (and I think of Heilbroner) and taught it in his History of Social Science course, which I TAed one semester. It was a pretty good book to use with undergrads– straightforward, easy and interesting to read.
Pretty conservative, too. There has always been a lot of talk about “liberal academia” and college towns are often described as “liberal.” Nowadays, people have been suggesting that this is changing somewhat and that the younger generations are more conservative than their predecessors.
But I’m not sure this is really such a huge change. I think there have always been mixed political opinions in academia (as well as in the media and in other places that are labeled as “liberal” or “conservative”– religious groups, for example). Individuals transmit their influence for decades through their work in whatever profession they choose.
And another thought: My sister was ranting on her art site the other day and she noted that what people usually describe as “morals” or “values” are actually opinions. I thought it was an important observation. It seems pretty easy to accept the idea that people have different opinions. I wonder why, then, it is often so hard for us to accept the idea that people have different “values.” People are very protective of their opinions about things, I guess. They *want* their worldview to be valid. Hmmm …
This line of thought was also prompted by a phone conversation this past weekend with my grandmother, who finds “what other families do” strange
Her perspective about this is mostly local, but I think it’s how people tend to react on a larger scale, too.