>A social science that can aspire to interesting smart ideas like that would
>not have much to apologize for. "There are interesting, simple ideas.
>They're often hard to come up with, and they're often extremely hard to
>work out ... what actually happened, say, in the modern industrial
>economy and how it developed the way it is. That can take a lot of work."
Why should an explanation of a long complex evolution that takes a lot of work emerge as "simple"? There's no royal road to knowledge, as the old guy said.
Doug