View source for Peart & Levy: Vanity of the Philosopher

1.  Attempt to explain the transition from classical to postclassical economics.

2.  Classical economics was based around the idea of hegemony, or equal compentence.
    -  This assumed that economic agents are all equipped with a capacity for language and trade, and that observed outcomes 
       are explained by incentives, luck, and history.

3.  Eventually, ideas about superiority and inferiority emerged
    -  Ex. Slaves, women, labouring classes, and the Irish

4.  Classical economists, of course, rejected the notions of race and hierarchy.
    -  Their excuse to the observed heterogeneity was to appeal to the incentives associated with different institutions.  For 
       example, John Stuart Mill argued that the "Irish problem" was largley a matter of institutions rather than one of 
       inherenet indolence.

5.  Once human hierarchy was recognized, people were seen as unequally deserving sympathy
    -  Those of us who were hardworking were seen as deserving more sympathy than those who were lazy.

6.  Peart and Levy's feeling was that an analytical system in which everyone counts equally and is presumed equally capable    of making decisions is the only sysyem that seems morally defensible.
    -  In all the instances in which a group has been treated as "different," difference has turned into hierarchy, 
and hierarchy has sometimes led terrible analytical and policy consequences.
    -  The inferior becomes any group who is presently out of favor with the analyst (the Vanity of the Philosopher)