Rev Austrian Econ (2011) 24:71–76 DOI 10.1007/s11138-011-0146-4 Specialists and citizens all: A reply to Boettke, Koppl, and Holcombe Robert F. Garnett Jr. Published online: 9 February 2011 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011 . . . Keywords Pluralism Republic of science Schools of thought Constitutional . . . . . . citizenship Rules Virtues Ethics Promiscuity Analytical egalitarianism James . . Buchanan Deirdre McCloskey Matt Ridley I am grateful to the Review of Austrian Economics and to Peter Boettke for welcoming this conversation about pluralism and Austrian economics. In my paper, “Why Should Austrian Economists be Pluralists?”, I highlighted an incongruity between Boettke's classical liberal vision of a free society and his vision of science as a free market (Boettke 2007). I had hoped to convince him that the density and dynamism of the scientific catallaxy depends upon the scholarly ethics of individual participants. I am gratified that Boettke seems to have been persuaded that academic competition is more likely to yield intellectual progress if scholars are able to “see things through different perspectives and understand, rather than just dismiss, the frameworks of intellectual opponents” (Boettke this issue, 2). By way of response to the papers by Boettke, Roger Koppl,
The Review of Austrian Economics – Springer Journals
Published: Feb 9, 2011
It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.
Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.
All for just $49/month
Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly
Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.
All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.
“Whoa! It’s like Spotify but for academic articles.”@Phil_Robichaud