Re: individualism vs holism.

[stephen block <stephenb@xxxxxxxx>]

OK Lawrence,

But I am wondering how liquidity preference fits in. And given that Keynes'
concerns were macro, not micro, I don't see how Keynes fits in to either of
these classifications. It would seem to me he is not an "individualist" and
certainly not an "atomist". Perhaps as Ted suggests, he is an organicist,
rather than a holist. Considering the distinctions which have been drawn
between Marx and Keynes recently here, perhaps in some respects it is a
matter of advocacy as well? That is, while Marx propagated on behalf of a
"collectivity" in some sense, Keynes' overall vision, while of social
justice, described "mass" behaviour within markets. So in that respect he is
not an individualist, but he is also not a "collectivist", as that
presupposes advocacy on behalf of the "collectivity"?

That is as far as I've gotten on this thus far. Thanks for the responses.

Stephen

Lawrence Boland wrote:

> My argument is that Keynes is a methodological individualist [MI] -- but it is
> important to recognize that long-run neoclassical economics is consistent only
> with what I call 'psychologistic individualism [PI]'. The methodological issue
> is
> about what exogenous variables are allowable in any explanation [see chapter
> 2].
> PI is a stronger requirement than MI. Short-run neoclassical explanations
> satisfy
> MI but not PI. PI allows only nature given exogenous variables (viz.
> preferences
> and resources from Nature). MI allows other exogenous variables (e.g.,
> constraints
> that are the result of past decisions).

> Ted Winslow wrote:
>
>> I would say Keynes is an "individualist" but not an "atomist".  The usual
>> treatment of "methodological individualism" conflates "individualism" with
>> "atomism" i.e. with the idea of individuals as having essences which are
>> independent of their relations.  The contrasting position to atomism is
>> "organicism" rather than "holism", where by "organicism" is meant the idea
>> that individuals owe their essential qualities - their "being" - to their
>> relations so that these qualities change with changes in the relations on
>> which they depend.