individualism vs holism.

[stephen block <stephenb@xxxxxxxx>]

Title: individualism vs holism.

I am rapidly reading through Lawrence Boland's _The Foundations of Economic Method_ for an on-line seminar and I have a question which likely members of this list can adequately answer for me. Boland raises a distinction between individualist Vs holist assumptions in economics. I have not read enough to see exactly where it will end in his book, but it occurs to me that this may be one way of distinguishing between Keynes' method and neoclassical and/or Schumpeter's method. It also occurs to me that this distinction is likely false and is in that respect a false dichotomy. That is, just because Keynes rejects methodological individualism does not mean that he is a "holist". I guess I am specifically thinking of "aggregate demand", but it may also be pertinent elsewhere (or may not be pertinent there). Would "aggregate demand " be a holist concept? In other words, does it imply that we must understand the behaviour of the whole "group", or society, as a group, or a whole, or is it a study of a different kind of "indicator" or set of indicators other than households and firms? Does Keynes' method go down the middle in some way, as it occurs to me it does. I simply cannot find the proper or adequate way to back up what I am considering.

I think that is my question. I hope it is clear. If not, I can attempt to clarify it. Any input, as to what Keynes might have said, or meant, in relation to this methodological dispute, or if anyone has written on it or related subjects, would be much appreciated.

Stephen Block
514 744 7135
efax: 954 212 5736