Off-campus access
Using PhilPapers from home?
Click here to configure this browser for off-campus access.
- Rod O'Donnell (1990). The Epistemology of J. M. Keynes. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 41 (3):333-350.This paper has two objectives, neither previously attempted in the published literature—first, to outline J. M. Keynes's theory of knowledge in some detail, and, secondly, to justify the contention that his epistemology is a variety of rationalism, and not, as many have asserted, a form of empiricism. Keynes's attitude to empirical data is also analysed as well as his views on prediction and theory choice. 1This paper is partly based on ideas initially advanced in O'Donnell [1982], a revised and expanded version of which is to be published as O'Donnell [1989]. I should like to thank an anonymous referee for helpful comment, and King's College, Cambridge for permission to quote from the Keynes Papers.
Similar books and articles
Roger Garrison's commentary on Alan Meltzer's interpretation of Keynes and Meltzer's interpretation itself are closer to each other and further from Keynes's sense than one might imagine. Keynes's logic rests on an unsubstantiated guess, as Keynes admitted, about the tendency for consumption to stagnate in an advanced economy; and on the nonsensical proposition that the possessors of loanable funds are unilaterally able to determine the cost of those funds outside of the supply?and?demand financial market.
No categories
No categories
No categories
No categories
In the concluding chapter of The General Theory, Keynes offers a vision of socialized investment, which, according to Allan Meltzer, informs Keynes's entire analysis and critique of laissez?faire capitalism. Roger Garrison adds a critical dimension to Meltzer's interpretation, contending that Keynes's vision of the ?comprehensive socialisation of investment,? with its zero rate of interest, is Utopian, thereby weakening Keynes's case against real?world capitalism. This paper defends Keynes, arguing that Garrison and Meltzer misconstrue both Keynes's theory of interest and his proposed socialization of investment. The paper criticizes Garrison's justification of interest earnings as ?a reward for waiting,? provides an alternative account of the economic arrangements implied by socialized investment, and, more generally, argues that Keynes's economic analysis shaped his social vision, not vice versa.
No categories
No categories
In this compelling book, John B. Davis examines the change and development in Keynes's philosophical thinking, from his earliest work through to The General Theory, arguing that Keynes came to believe himself mistaken about a number of his early philosophical concepts. The author begins by looking at the unpublished 'Apostles' papers, written under the influence of the philosopher G. E. Moore. These display the tensions in Keynes's early philosophical views, and outline his philosophical concepts of the time, including the concept of intuition. Davis then shows how Keynes's later philosophy is implicit in the economic argument of The General Theory. He argues that Keynes's philosophy had by this time changed radically, and that he had abandoned the concept of intuition for the concept of convention. The author sees this as being the central idea in The General Theory, and looks at the philosophical nature of this concept of convention in detail.
Keynes's A Treatise on Probability (Keynes, 1921) contains some quite unusual concepts, such as non-numerical probabilities and the ‘weights of the arguments’ that support probability judgements. Their controversial interpretation gave rise to a huge literature about ‘what Keynes really did mean’, also because Keynes's later views in macroeconomics ultimately rest on his ideas on uncertainty and expectations formation.
Popper's paradox of ideal evidence has long been viewed as a telling criticism of Keynes's logical theory of probability and its associated concept of the weight of argument. This paper shows that a simple addition to Keynes's definitions of irrelevance enables his theory to elude the paradox with ease. The modified definition draws on ideas already present in Keynes's Treatise on Probability (1973). As a consequence, relevant evidence and the weight of argument may increase, even when new evidence leaves the probability unaltered.
Discussion of Rod O'Donnell, The epistemology of J. M. Keynes
|
|
There are no threads in this forum |
Nothing in this forum yet.

