ABSTRACT
It would, no doubt, be both tactless and improper for a foreigner to meddle in the domestic dispute provoked by Mr Miller’s contention that there is a distinct and recognizable ‘Chicago School’ of economics,1 even on the pretext of offering his services as an impartial, self-appointed arbitrator. Nevertheless, as one not unfamiliar with the current academic scene and the history of American economics, I cannot forbear to comment on certain curious parallels between the present situation and the 1890s and early 1900s, when the Department of Economics at the new University of Chicago first made an impact on the higher learning in the USA. In an effort to minimize the inevitable misunderstandings, let me emphasize that, apart from a few noncommittal concluding remarks, I am primarily concerned with the past, not with the present; that, although this note was prompted by Miller’s paper, it refers only indirectly to the substantive issues raised by him and by his commentators; and that, as far as I am aware, there is no doctrinal continuity between the initial period-which, at the very latest, terminates with J.L.Laughlin’s retirement as head of the department in 1916-and more recent circumstances.
