ABSTRACT
In the months following the formation of the American Economic Association (AEA), debate focused more sharply than ever on what it meant to be an economist. To a degree the exploration of the role followed familiar patterns. Debate over doctrine continued to be couched in terms of what was considered orthodox and what was innovative or revolutionary. But there were also new ingredients in the discussion, novel ways of behaving, emerging expectations and institutions that changed the nature of an economist's activity and altered his patterns of communication both with other economists and with the public. Among representatives of the two extremes in economic thinking, patterns of confrontation remained stable. As the Science debate unfolded against a background of bitter social conflict, it disclosed a potential for accommodation among moderates on both sides of the economic controversy. Thinking in both groups was converging on similar patterns of professionalism.
