“We have weaker tiesâ€”weaker connections with each otherâ€”but we have more of themâ€¦ We still have community in the modern world.”
On a recent talk given by Deirdre on the “Spectre of Ignorance” series at University of Denver’s Josef Korbel School a student writes (10 February 2012):
She also happens to be a Professor of Economics, English, History AND Communications at one of the country's top universities, which is evident from her quirky, inclusive style of speaking that allows her to convey complex subject matter to a lay audience in a way that is both entertaining and informative.
View full entry.
From FEMINIST AND GENDER THEORY, 28 January 2012:
[I]t wasn't until [Deirdre] actually lived as a women [sic] that she realized just how differently women are treated.
Aldo Rustichini and the grand Salamanca lecture hall
“Riflessioni su economia e materie umanistiche“(Reflections on economics and the humanities), Noise from Amerika, 11 October 2011. For our Italian readers, Andrea Moro writes about a vigorous discussion between Deirdre and Aldo Rustichini in Salamanca.
See “Economist Deirdre McCloskey to visit Pomona College, by Sneha Abraham, Pomona College News, October 11, 2011.
An assignment on Bourgeois Dignity: Why Economics Can’t Explain the Modern World leads to an appearance by the author.
Note: see for particulars on Prof. McCloskey’s appearances our Public Relations page.
Sam Levison raves about Deirdre’s lecture in in Brown University’s online newspaper. See his entry in the Daily Blog Herald, 1 November 2011.
As introduction to viewing a copy of the lecture at the Mercatus Center on Bourgeois Dignity, The Student Network for Human Security say, “So many times we have heard that human security is about dignity, but what is that? Economic historian Deirdre McCloskey has an idea that is worth considering. Enjoy.”
Posted 23 Feb. 2011. Original site »
I just watched online the recording of your Beyond Belief talk, in which you were cautious not to explain what sparked innovation in 18th c. England except to argue that it was ideological. I was surprised at your restraint, because it seems like you had the makings of a nice just-so story there on the counter you'd laid out. At least as one push in the direction of ignition, how about the rise to international celebrity and to statesman stature of Ben Franklin, who was a paradigm "self-made manâ€? (Note you even have a literal spark figuring in that story line, as well as a Leiden Jar, I believe). Part and parcel of Franklin's personal rise would have been the success of the American revolution, by which a bunch of entrepreneurial frontiersmen were recognized as having created a sovereign and independent society in the New World. Also aren't Americans famous at least among ourselves for our resourcefulness and ingenuity? I could believe a lot of this was involved in developing the New World. To be successful in a New Worldâ€“faced with new problems, new resources and a very large newly imposed cost and delay in delivery of hardware from the previously established providersâ€“had to have taken ingenuity. You even have patents entering as Article I of the new Constitution. The ideology of self-making may just go along with imperial expansionâ€“allowing the rise of new Roman families to prominence alongside older ones, and necessitating more democratic governance. You could say new land begets a renegotiation of the pecking order, or social standing, which is chiefly what we compete for, once safe, sheltered, fed and watered. O.K. Done rambling. Enjoyed your talk!