Re: Is Keynes a Positivist

[Colin Danby <danbyc@xxxxxxx>]

Just a few disconnected comments.  Re Stephen:

> In his General Theory, Keynes writes: "The outline of our
> theory can be expressed as follows. When employment increases,
> aggregate real income is increased". (p. 27) According to
> Lawson, in his book Economics and Reality, positivism can be
> characterised in terms of the belief that: "If science is to
> be at all possible, it must take the form of elaborating
> regularities of the type 'whenever event x then event y'"
> (p. 19) Hence Keynes is a positivist - or am I missing
> something? Stephen Parsons

If every positivist propounds theories of the
type "if x then y," it doesn't follow that
everyone who propounds theories of this type
is a positivist.  I.e. there are non-positivist
uses of "if x then y" theories.  Positivists
love measurable data and directly-observable
phenomena of all kinds and want to stick as
close to them as possible; they shun unobservable
categories and any kind of metaphysics.  I'm
not sure that describes Keynes.  There's a
burgeoning literature on Keynes and philosophy
if you want to chase this down.

Then Chip:

> ? the attraction is that at least some heterodox economists
> wish to construct a model that is "realistic", and it has
> certainly been a tenet of Post Keynesian/Neo-Ricardian thought
> that there are some properties of  reality that cannot be
> ignored by a model.   An example is the long debate over
> production functions between Cambridge UK and Cambridge US.

I always thought the most telling point on
the UK side was that the US position was
logically incoherent.

> One reason I would not call Keynes a positivist is because
> of his emphasis on disequilibrium adjustments and uncertainty.
> I think positivism depends on the presence of simple, causal
> relationships.

Makes sense.

> This affinity is not shared by all heterodox economists. A
> substantial portion are influenced by post-modernism.

Let's be clear though that there's a number
of distinct positions, not just a stark
positivist/pomo divide.

> I think you will also find heterodox economists who
> unconsciously or consciously adopt a positivist position.

Some heterodox economists are deeply
committed to positivism because they
believe their only weapon against
encroaching orthodoxy is proof that their
models fit the data better.

Best, Colin