A New Perspective on Shackle's Keynesian Fundamentalism

In preparing this article, I have approached Shackle's “fundamentalist” interpretation of Keynes from a slightly different angle. Much of the discussion as to whether Shackle is right tends to get bogged down in a rather narrow textual exegisis. That is, debates that focus on whether the 1937 Quarterly Journal of Economics article means more, or less, than Keynes's apparent “endorsement” of IS/LM Keynesianism contained in his famous letter to Hicks. This type of discussion too easily overlooks the more fundamental methodological considerations that motivate Shackle. Such issues as the way in which economic actors acquire knowledge and the nature of economics as a social science are important to him. Therefore], a more meaningful way of assessing Shackle's views would be to consider whether they are in sympathy with Keynes's views on such matters.