It's common for free-marketeers to be branded as "dogmatic" - and I can understand why. But confidence and dogmatism aren't the same thing. Speaking only for myself, I try to subject my opinions to logical reasoning and empirical validation, and consider my current beliefs (I'm an Austrian economist, and a Manchester/classical liberal) to be the outcome of consideration and contemplation. I know this, because my beliefs change over time - and have changed radically.
I know that many of my opponants are less willing to think boldly, and outright refuse to consider alternative viewpoints. Not because the other theories consistently fail, but purely because of a dogmatic tie to a crucial component of their existing belief structure.
Consider this excerpt from Dan Klein's "The People's Romance":
"In the course of his remarks, Solow said that he did not find school choice appealing. During the question-and-answer period, I [Klein] asked him why he did not find school vouchers appealing. He replied: 'It isn't for any economic reason; all the economic reasons favor school vouchers. It is because what made me an American is the United States Army and the public school system."
All i'm saying is that there should be a distinction between dogmatism that results from reason, and dogmatism that prevents reason.
Thanks for sharing. This website is to I too have to help. Very good.
Posted by: Cheap Jordan 1 | October 01, 2011 at 04:47 AM