J. M. Keynes; Liberalism and Keynes; Keynes's Personal Life; Keynes's School Years
History has witnessed many great individuals who have had unforgettable impact and great influences on societies that they may not last for centuries. Among these, doubtless to say, John Maynard Keynes was one of the most influenced social scientists. It is therefore the subject of this study to briefly examine his personal life from his birth and school years. This study shows that John Maynard Keynes life carries so many distinguished features that are to be invaluable examples for young economists and scientists.
Imaginative methods: a feminist rereading of John Maynard Keynes
........................................................................................................4
Did Keynes Mean Anything? Rejoinder to Yeager
ProfessorYeager may be justified inhis complaint that I havedefended my interpretation of Keynes of 20 years ago merely by “emphatic reassertion.” I have tried consistently to refrain from rearguing my case, when I have had nothing much to add to it, in response to the various commentaries and criticismsthat have been raisedagainst it. Repetition of that sort has seldom proved productive. At some point, one must simply leave it to readers to make their own judgments without boring them with one’s insistence on having been right. When Yeager alluded to the matter in his recent paper, I wished merely to signal that I do not concede to his critique (or very much toGrossman’s). But this time, therealso was something to add,namely, the previously unknown evidence from Keynes’ Collected Writings, vol. XXIX, which has appeared in the interim. Yeager’s “Reply” makes clear, however, that mere reassertion plus that reference will not do. I owe him an explanation of how it fits in. I do not want to argue that Keynes “was right all along.” So that is not the issue. What is at issue is the theme of my 1968 book which maintained that the General Theory contained a novel and important theoretical idea, that this idea was central toKeynes’ conception, and that this idea was not developed, or even preserved, in the later development of Keynesian economics. This “promise which the Keynesian tradition has not fulfilled” (p. 386) inheres in the idea of “effective demand failures.” In his 1973 “Keynesian Diversion”article, ProfessorYeagerdeclared that, on his reading of Keynes, while much in the General Theory strikingly resembles “the supposedly vulgar Keynesianism of the income-expenditure theory,” Keynes “falls short of articulating any-