We now look into the logic of economics and the psychology …

We now look into the logic of economics and the psychology of famous economists. In the history of economics, we see arguments that are good, honest, straightforward, and logical which explain why independence and the institution of private property are necessary conditions for the wealth of a modern economy, and we see opposing arguments which are characterized by obscurity, evasion, and emotional reasoning that are used to promote centralized control. Sometimes both types of argument are seen in the same person. I have said above that goodness is economic and evil is psychological and thus in the history of economic thought I see a clash of good and evil along these lines. Unfortunately, among those who I find to be honest and straightforward, I find a severe lack of understanding of the psychology of the other side, to the extent that F. A. Hayek was so easily manipulated that Keynes made him believe, up to the end of his life, that he (Keynes) was continuously on the verge of coming around to Hayek's side. These economists will autistically document every fallacy in Marx or Keynes and will not understand that they will still be ignored. Among economists, one of the best psychologists was Thomas Sowell. If you read Thomas Sowell, his books are full of snarky comments about the psychology of his opponents. Unfortunately, I think it was a missed opportunity for Sowell not to go more deeply into psychology, which he could see was the biggest reason that his ideas were not more adopted. If he had changed fields to psychology part way through his career, he could have accomplished a lot more for the advancement of economics. There is a great need to combine economics and psychology in order to win arguments in the future.