To Paul Medow (19 February 1958) - Revision history

Santiago Pinault at 08:19, 8 September 2018

2018-09-08T08:19:18Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:19, 8 September 2018
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{Page \|n°=55}} Dear Paul,		{{Page \|n°=55}} Dear Paul,

	Harry is not far off the mark in speaking of a ~~“stern~~ refusal by the economists (and, I think, others) to consider a substantive position for a comparative ~~economics”~~. Nevertheless, I have based my (recent) own individual application to the Rockefeller Foundation precisely on this position. In regard to the economist’s achievements on the underdeveloped countries (in spite of some good work) I wrote that nothing could be really expected without some ''basic research'' such as only substantive concepts make possible. I expressly referred to Menger’s posthumous edition of his ''Grundsätze'' (1923) which had been consistently ignored – it is still untranslated – by the [m]ost of economists writing on the history of economic doctrines.		Harry is not far off the mark in speaking of a “[[From_Harry_Pearson_(1_February_1958)\|stern refusal by the economists (and, I think, others) to consider a substantive position for a comparative economics]]”. Nevertheless, I have based my (recent) own individual application to the Rockefeller Foundation precisely on this position. In regard to the economist’s achievements on the underdeveloped countries (in spite of some good work) I wrote that nothing could be really expected without some ''basic research'' such as only substantive concepts make possible. I expressly referred to Menger’s posthumous edition of his ''Grundsätze'' (1923) which had been consistently ignored – it is still untranslated – by the [m]ost of economists writing on the history of economic doctrines.
	I do believe now that we should all equip ourselves with some minimum references to this explosive material. It has been ticking for 35 years – that time bomb, I mean.		I do believe now that we should all equip ourselves with some minimum references to this explosive material. It has been ticking for 35 years – that time bomb, I mean.

Santiago Pinault at 22:04, 22 December 2017

2017-12-22T22:04:09Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:04, 22 December 2017
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{Page \|n°=55}} Dear Paul,		{{Page \|n°=55}} Dear Paul,

	Harry is not far off the mark in speaking of a “stern refusal by the economists (and, I think, others) to consider a substantive position for a comparative economics”. Nevertheless, I have based my (recent) own individual application to the Rockefeller Foundation precisely on this position. In regard to the economist’s achievements on the underdeveloped countries (in spite of some good work) I wrote that nothing could be really expected without some ''basic research'' such as only substantive concepts make possible. I expressly referred to Menger’s posthumous edition of his ''Grundsätze'' (1923) which had been consistently ignored – it is still untranslated – by the [m]ost~~<ref>Sic.</ref>~~ of economists writing on the history of economic doctrines.		Harry is not far off the mark in speaking of a “stern refusal by the economists (and, I think, others) to consider a substantive position for a comparative economics”. Nevertheless, I have based my (recent) own individual application to the Rockefeller Foundation precisely on this position. In regard to the economist’s achievements on the underdeveloped countries (in spite of some good work) I wrote that nothing could be really expected without some ''basic research'' such as only substantive concepts make possible. I expressly referred to Menger’s posthumous edition of his ''Grundsätze'' (1923) which had been consistently ignored – it is still untranslated – by the [m]ost of economists writing on the history of economic doctrines.
	I do believe now that we should all equip ourselves with some minimum references to this explosive material. It has been ticking for 35 years – that time bomb, I mean.		I do believe now that we should all equip ourselves with some minimum references to this explosive material. It has been ticking for 35 years – that time bomb, I mean.

Santiago Pinault at 21:59, 22 December 2017

2017-12-22T21:59:12Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:59, 22 December 2017
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{Page \|n°=55}} Dear Paul~~<ref>Paul Medow?</ref>~~,		{{Page \|n°=55}} Dear Paul,

	Harry is not far off the mark in speaking of a “stern refusal by the economists (and, I think, others) to consider a substantive position for a comparative economics”. Nevertheless, I have based my (recent) own individual application to the Rockefeller Foundation precisely on this position. In regard to the economist’s achievements on the underdeveloped countries (in spite of some good work) I wrote that nothing could be really expected without some ''basic research'' such as only substantive concepts make possible. I expressly referred to Menger’s posthumous edition of his ''Grundsätze'' (1923) which had been consistently ignored – it is still untranslated – by the ~~host~~<ref>Sic.</ref> of economists writing on the history of economic doctrines.		Harry is not far off the mark in speaking of a “stern refusal by the economists (and, I think, others) to consider a substantive position for a comparative economics”. Nevertheless, I have based my (recent) own individual application to the Rockefeller Foundation precisely on this position. In regard to the economist’s achievements on the underdeveloped countries (in spite of some good work) I wrote that nothing could be really expected without some ''basic research'' such as only substantive concepts make possible. I expressly referred to Menger’s posthumous edition of his ''Grundsätze'' (1923) which had been consistently ignored – it is still untranslated – by the [m]ost<ref>Sic.</ref> of economists writing on the history of economic doctrines.
	I do believe now that we should all equip ourselves with some minimum references to this explosive material. It has been ticking for 35 years – that time bomb, I mean.		I do believe now that we should all equip ourselves with some minimum references to this explosive material. It has been ticking for 35 years – that time bomb, I mean.

Line 9:		Line 9:

	(signed) Karl		(signed) Karl

	~~== Editor's Notes ==~~

	~~<references />~~

	== Letter Informations ==		== Letter Informations ==
	'''Reference''':<br>		'''Reference''':<br>
	'''KPA''': [[50/02]], 55		'''KPA''': [[50/02]], 55

Santiago Pinault at 20:18, 22 December 2017

2017-12-22T20:18:30Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:18, 22 December 2017
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{Page \|n=55}} Dear Paul<ref>Paul Medow?</ref>,		{{Page \|n°=55}} Dear Paul<ref>Paul Medow?</ref>,

	Harry is not far off the mark in speaking of a “stern refusal by the economists (and, I think, others) to consider a substantive position for a comparative economics”. Nevertheless, I have based my (recent) own individual application to the Rockefeller Foundation precisely on this position. In regard to the economist’s achievements on the underdeveloped countries (in spite of some good work) I wrote that nothing could be really expected without some ''basic research'' such as only substantive concepts make possible. I expressly referred to Menger’s posthumous edition of his ''Grundsätze'' (1923) which had been consistently ignored – it is still untranslated – by the host<ref>Sic.</ref> of economists writing on the history of economic doctrines.		Harry is not far off the mark in speaking of a “stern refusal by the economists (and, I think, others) to consider a substantive position for a comparative economics”. Nevertheless, I have based my (recent) own individual application to the Rockefeller Foundation precisely on this position. In regard to the economist’s achievements on the underdeveloped countries (in spite of some good work) I wrote that nothing could be really expected without some ''basic research'' such as only substantive concepts make possible. I expressly referred to Menger’s posthumous edition of his ''Grundsätze'' (1923) which had been consistently ignored – it is still untranslated – by the host<ref>Sic.</ref> of economists writing on the history of economic doctrines.
Line 9:		Line 9:

	(signed) Karl		(signed) Karl

			== Editor's Notes ==

			<references />

	== Letter Informations ==		== Letter Informations ==
	'''Reference''':<br>		'''Reference''':<br>
	'''KPA''': [[50/02]], 55		'''KPA''': [[50/02]], 55

Santiago Pinault at 20:17, 22 December 2017

2017-12-22T20:17:50Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:17, 22 December 2017
Line 1:		Line 1:
	Dear Paul,		{{Page \|n=55}} Dear Paul<ref>Paul Medow?</ref>,

	Harry is not far off the mark in speaking of a ~~stern~~		Harry is not far off the mark in speaking of a “stern refusal by the economists (and, I think, others) to consider a substantive position for a comparative economics”. Nevertheless, I have based my (recent) own individual application to the Rockefeller Foundation precisely on this position. In regard to the economist’s achievements on the underdeveloped countries (in spite of some good work) I wrote that nothing could be really expected without some ''basic research'' such as only substantive concepts make possible. I expressly referred to Menger’s posthumous edition of his ''Grundsätze'' (1923) which had been consistently ignored – it is still untranslated – by the host<ref>Sic.</ref> of economists writing on the history of economic doctrines.
			I do believe now that we should all equip ourselves with some minimum references to this explosive material. It has been ticking for 35 years – that time bomb, I mean.

			Looking forward to Saturday.

			Ever.

			(signed) Karl

	== Letter Informations ==		== Letter Informations ==
	'''Reference''':<br>		'''Reference''':<br>
	'''KPA''': [[50/02]], 55		'''KPA''': [[50/02]], 55

Santiago Pinault: Created page with "Dear Paul, Harry is not far off the mark in speaking of a stern == Letter Informations == '''Reference''':
'''KPA''': 50/02, 55"

2017-12-22T20:15:24Z

Created page with "Dear Paul, Harry is not far off the mark in speaking of a stern == Letter Informations == '''Reference''':<br> '''KPA''': 50/02, 55"

New page

Dear Paul,

Harry is not far off the mark in speaking of a stern

== Letter Informations ==
'''Reference''':<br>
'''KPA''': [[50/02]], 55