Continuity and change in Keynes's thought: the importance of Hume

Abstract

Keynes's economic thought underwent a major transition during the course of his life; in recent years a debate has arisen over whether Keynes's philosophical thought underwent a similar transition. This paper argues that, despite the existence of significant continuities, Keynes's philosophical thinking did undergo a major change, and specifically that this change can be seen clearly when Keynes's philosphy is viewed in the context of the philosophy of David Hume: the early Keynes attempted to answer Hume's analysis of induction, but the later Keynes accepted Hume's sceptical conclusion that custom and not reason is the ‘guide of life’.

Keywords:

• Keynes
• Hume
• Uncertainty
• Induction
• Probability
• Rationality

^*An earlier version of this paper was presented at the International Economics and Philosophy Society session at the meetings of the Central Division of the American Philasophical Association in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, in April 1997 and at the meetings of the History of Economics Society in Charleston, South Carolina, in June 1997. The author gratefully acknowledges helpful comments from participants in those sessions and especially from John Davis. Usual caveats apply.

^*An earlier version of this paper was presented at the International Economics and Philosophy Society session at the meetings of the Central Division of the American Philasophical Association in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, in April 1997 and at the meetings of the History of Economics Society in Charleston, South Carolina, in June 1997. The author gratefully acknowledges helpful comments from participants in those sessions and especially from John Davis. Usual caveats apply.

Notes

^*An earlier version of this paper was presented at the International Economics and Philosophy Society session at the meetings of the Central Division of the American Philasophical Association in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, in April 1997 and at the meetings of the History of Economics Society in Charleston, South Carolina, in June 1997. The author gratefully acknowledges helpful comments from participants in those sessions and especially from John Davis. Usual caveats apply.