There is something, however humble, which can properly be called skill among those who recognise themselves as economists.

The organization of science into disciplines sets up a series of ghettos with remarkable distances of artificial social space between them.

It is much more accurate to identify the factors of production as know-how (that is genetic information structure), energy, and materials, for, as we have seen, all processes of production involve the direction of energy by some know-how structure toward the selection, transportation, and transformation of materials into the product

All knowledge is gained through an orderly loss of information.

If a totally new image is to come into being however, there must be sensitivity to internal messages, the image itself must be sensitive to change, must be unstable, and it must include a value image which places high value on trials, experiments, and the trying of new things.

Economics, we learn in the history of thought, only became a science by escaping from the casuistry and moralizing of medieval thought.

Perhaps the most difficult ethical problem of the scientific community arises not so much from conflict with other subcultures as from its own success. Nothing fails like success because we don't learn from it. We learn only from failure.