Teaching Post Keynesian Economics
Show Less

Teaching Post Keynesian Economics

Edited by Jesper Jespersen and Mogens Ove Madsen

This book contends that post Keynesian economics has its own methodological and didactic basis, and its realistic analysis is much-needed in the current economic and financial crisis. At a time when the original message of Keynes’ General Theory is no longer present in the most university syllabuses, this book celebrates the uniqueness of teaching post Keynesian economics, providing comparisons with traditional economic rationale and illustrating the advantages of post Keynesian pedagogy.
Buy Book in Print
Show Summary Details
You do not have access to this content

Chapter 6: Truth and beauty in macroeconomics

Allin Cottrell


‘Beauty is truth, truth beauty.’ So wrote John Keats. Paul Krugman thinks this doesn’t apply in macroeconomics: beauty lies with neoclassical macroeconomics, which is untrue and useless as a guide to policy, while Keynesian economics – the nearest thing we have to truth – is ugly. In his popular article, ‘How did economists get it so wrong?’ (2009), Krugman disparages neoclassical macro as seriously misleading – a ‘romanticized and sanitized vision of the economy’– and associates it with a ‘Dark Age of macroeconomics in which hard-won knowledge has been forgotten.’ Yet he also describes it as ‘intellectually elegant’ and talks of the ‘clarity, completeness and sheer beauty that characterizes the full neoclassical approach.’ And while he praises Keynes and says that ‘Keynesian economics remains the best framework for making sense of recessions and depressions,’ he holds that its realism is founded on recognition of messy ‘flaws and frictions.’ The revamped Keynesianism towards which he hopes the economics profession will evolve ‘may not be all that clear’ and ‘certainly won’t be neat.’ In the following I will defend Keats’s view, arguing that truth and beauty in macroeconomics are more closely aligned than Krugman allows. Specifically, my claim will be that Keynes’s theory, rightly interpreted, exhibits an elegance and coherence that Krugman somehow misses. Before launching that argument, however, I’d like to register substantive agreement with Krugman on the macro issues of the day.

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

or login to access all content.