IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/mac/wpaper/0413.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Keynes's Principles of Writing (Innovative) Economics

Author

Listed:
  • Rod O'Donnell

    (Department of Economics, Macquarie University)

Abstract

This paper investigates Keynes’s writings in the 1920s and 30s to uncover his views on the writing of economics, especially the writing of innovative or path-breaking works. His ideas were mainly presented in comments on other economists (particularly Marshall, Jevons and Malthus), and in reflections on his own experiences (chiefly in his 1932-33 lectures and a 1934 draft preface to the General Theory). These ideas are converted into five underlying principles, the implications of which are discussed in terms of their impact on the clarity and interpretation of his writings and of their relevance to all writings in economics.

Suggested Citation

  • Rod O'Donnell, 2004. "Keynes's Principles of Writing (Innovative) Economics," Research Papers 0413, Macquarie University, Department of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:mac:wpaper:0413
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.econ.mq.edu.au/research/2004/KEYNES_PRINCIPLES.pdf
    File Function: First Version, 2004
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rod O'Donnell, 1992. "The Unwritten Books and Papers of J. M. Keynes," History of Political Economy, Duke University Press, vol. 24(4), pages 767-817, Winter.
    2. McCloskey,Deirdre N., 1994. "Knowledge and Persuasion in Economics," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521436038, September.
    3. McCloskey,Deirdre N., 1994. "Knowledge and Persuasion in Economics," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521434751, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ioana Negru, 2013. "Revisiting the Concept of Schools of Thought in Economics: The Example of the Austrian School," American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 72(4), pages 983-1008, October.
    2. Claus Dierksmeier, 2011. "The Freedom–Responsibility Nexus in Management Philosophy and Business Ethics," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 101(2), pages 263-283, June.
    3. Graupe, Silja & Steffestun, Theresa, 2018. ""The market deals out profit and losses": Wie ökonomische Standardlehrbücher das unreflektierte Denken in Metaphern fördern," Working Paper Serie des Instituts für Ökonomie Ök-38, Hochschule für Gesellschaftsgestaltung (HfGG), Institut für Ökonomie.
    4. McCloskey Deirdre Nansen, 2018. "The Two Movements in Economic Thought, 1700–2000: Empty Economic Boxes Revisited," Man and the Economy, De Gruyter, vol. 5(2), pages 1-20, December.
    5. Warren Samuels, 1995. "Some thoughts on multiplicity," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 2(2), pages 287-292.
    6. Yalcintas, Altug, 2012. "İktisat doga bilimlerinin Mekke’si mi oluyor?: Toplumsal ve doga bilimleri iliskisi uzerine bir atıf analizi [Is economics becoming the Mecca of Biology?: A citation analysis of the relationship be," MPRA Paper 43493, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Simon Mohun, 1999. "Markets, Money and Ideology," Working Papers 402, Queen Mary University of London, School of Economics and Finance.
    8. David C. Batten, 1999. "The Mismatch Argument: The Construction of a Housing Orthodoxy in Australia," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 36(1), pages 137-151, January.
    9. Spencer, David A, 2000. "The Demise of Radical Political Economics? An Essay on the Evolution of a Theory of Capitalist Production," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 24(5), pages 543-564, September.
    10. Andrew Yuengert, 2006. "Model selection and multiple research goals: The case of rational addiction," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(1), pages 77-96.
    11. Wilfred Dolfsma & Patrick J. Welch, 2009. "Paradigms and Novelty in Economics: The History of Economic Thought as a Source of Enlightenment," American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 68(5), pages 1085-1106, November.
    12. Mary Morgan, 2001. "Models, stories and the economic world," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(3), pages 361-384.
    13. Michael Perelman, 2011. "Retrospectives: X-Efficiency," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 25(4), pages 211-222, Fall.
    14. Deirdre Nansen McCloskey, 2019. "Lachmann practiced humanomics, beyond the dogma of behaviorism," The Review of Austrian Economics, Springer;Society for the Development of Austrian Economics, vol. 32(1), pages 47-61, March.
    15. Irmi Seidl & Clement A Tisdell & Steve Harrison, 2002. "Environmental Regulation of Land Use and Public Compensation: Principles, and Swiss and Australian Examples," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 20(5), pages 699-716, October.
    16. Hugh Rockoff, 1998. "By Way of Analogy: The Expansion of the Federal Government in the 1930s," NBER Chapters, in: The Defining Moment: The Great Depression and the American Economy in the Twentieth Century, pages 125-154, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    17. Peter Maskell & Mark Lorenzen, 2004. "The Cluster as Market Organisation," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 41(5-6), pages 991-1009, May.
    18. Reiter, Sara Ann & Williams, Paul F., 2002. "The structure and progressivity of accounting research: the crisis in the academy revisited," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 27(6), pages 575-607, August.
    19. Ziliak, Stephen T. & McCloskey, Deirdre N., 2004. "Significance redux," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 33(5), pages 665-675, November.
    20. Kyle Siler, 2013. "Citation choice and innovation in science studies," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 95(1), pages 385-415, April.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:mac:wpaper:0413. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Helen Boneham (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/edmqqau.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.