Keynes’s General Theory for Today

Keynes’s General Theory for Today

Contemporary Perspectives

Edited by Jesper Jespersen and Mogens Ove Madsen

The themes of this important new volume were chosen to mark the 75th anniversary of the publication of The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money. The distinguished authors concentrate on the relevance of this seminal publication for macroeconomic theory, method and the politics of today. This is particularly pertinent as similarities with the 1930s are striking in terms of unemployment, low growth, financial fragility and the European monetary union resembling the gold standard.

Chapter 4: Keynes on method: is economics a moral science?

Michael Lainé

Subjects: economics and finance, history of economic thought, post-keynesian economics


In the history of science, Galileo triggered a major breakthrough: by considering mathematics as nature’s language, he wiped away the Aristotelian tradition, so far prevalent, according to which mathematics shaped the laws of the sole divine spheres. An enthusiastic proponent of his method, Kepler helped to spread the new scientific gospel. Nowadays, heaven is still on earth and the fact that mathematics is truth’s language has become conventional wisdom. As a matter of fact, mainstream economics, buttressed by positivism, relies on an extensive use of mathematical modelling. Despite his mathematical skills, Keynes endorsed a dualist view: in a famous letter to Roy Harrod he put forth that economics should be regarded as a ‘moral science’, different from natural sciences. Since the main focus of his theories was on psychology and uncertainty, mathematics was of little help. The methodological outlines of The General Theory were expounded in Chapter 18, of paramount importance in Shackle’s opinion (Sardoni 1989). In fact, owing to these conflicting views, economics has made little progress since the years of high theory, for mainstream is rather impervious to criticisms that do not grow out of the same epistemological ground. According to Lawson (2006), the remaining discrepancies between heterodoxy and mainstream only stem from an epistemological tenet, the latter relying on formal-deductive positivist methods, the former endorsing realism.

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

Elgaronline requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals. Please login through your library system or with your personal username and password on the homepage.

Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/ extracts and download selected front matter and introductory chapters for personal use.

Your library may not have purchased all subject areas. If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

Further information