Negative Positive
Title: Very good
Review: Skousen says his book is meant to be an alternative to the history of economic thought presented by Robert Heilbroner in 'The Worldly Philosophers'. In that it largely succeeds, and Skousen's history is the more honest of the two because, unlike Heilbroner, he makes his ideological biases and point of view explicit to the reader. A pretty good overview of the main tendencies in economic thought can be had by reading both books.Skousen's book is well worth reading, so it's too bad that it was so sloppily edited and carelessly proofread. Nassau Senior is called Senior Nassau (twice), Malthus is said to have died in 1934 (twice), words are misspelled, bibliography entries are not correctly alphabetized, sentences that should not have survived a first draft are left as written, etc. Corrections should have been made before the paperback edition was released.
Is the review positive or negative? 