George Stigler’s Career Moves: The Roles of Contingency, Self-Interest, Ideology, and Intellectual Commitment

Author/Creator

Author/Creator ORCID

Date

2020-05-23

Department

Program

Citation of Original Publication

Mitch D. (2020) George Stigler’s Career Moves: The Roles of Contingency, Self-Interest, Ideology, and Intellectual Commitment. In: Freedman C. (eds) George Stigler. Palgrave Macmillan, London, https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-56815-1_8

Rights

This item is likely protected under Title 17 of the U.S. Copyright Law. Unless on a Creative Commons license, for uses protected by Copyright Law, contact the copyright holder or the author.
Access to this item will begin on 5/23/22

Subjects

Abstract

George Stigler is commonly seen as one of the central figures in such a Chicago School of Economics. However, he did not actually take a faculty position at the University of Chicago until the age of 47. This essay will provide a narrative account of George Stigler’s various career transitions from graduate school through his “retirement.” This narrative structure will employed to bring out what archival material implies about a number of general themes regarding Stigler’s career. Particular attention will be devoted to the 1946 episode in which Chicago failed to make him an offer and the 1957-8 episode in which W. Allen Wallis successfully induced to him take over the Walgreen Foundation and Walgreen Professorship. A first theme considered concerns the role of contingency in Stigler’s academic appointments. A second theme concerns the intellectual diversity of the academic milieus in which Stigler operated counter to the conventional view of a monolithic free market focused Chicago school. A third theme concerns the extent to which Stigler was a partisan or a scientist in his academic endeavors and whether he viewed the economics profession as more swayed by the social environment of its times or whether it made independent scientific and intellectual contributions to social policy. A final theme will concern the extent to which Stigler as Nik-Kah has suggested was an empire builder, especially during his tenure as Walgreen Professor of American Institutions and then in establishing the Center for the Study of the Economy and the State. Brief consideration is also given to the issue of how to reconcile these contrasting if not conflicting features of Stigler’s career.