ABSTRACT
It is always a question in writing for a festschrift as to whether to present a piece of one's own research — presumably inspired by the person being honored — or to write specifically about that person himself. In this case, there is not a real choice. Duncan and I come from very different traditions in economics. Indeed, I am not sure whether Duncan recognizes me as an economist at all, so the direct overlap of our work is limited. Yet, Duncan has represented a critical reference point in my own thinking and intellectual development. In part, this is because he comes out of what is now the mainstream of the discipline, and hence speaks with a voice to which I have always felt compelled to listen and where possible to respond. But it is also because he has been one of the few critical voices speaking from that perspective, and hence always seemed to promise to help us understand not only the limits of mainstream economics that are apparent from the outside but also its internal weaknesses as well. But, perhaps most fundamentally, I have always felt that we were wrestling with the same questions about the role of economics in the world, however different our perspectives and our answers. In this, the way in which Duncan has exercised his influence on me is a puzzle, and it is some of the pieces of that puzzle which I am going to try to lay out here and draw together.
