Dr. Palley and the merits of conflict

Arne Heise

No 105, ZÖSS-Discussion Papers from University of Hamburg, Centre for Economic and Sociological Studies (CESS/ZÖSS)

Abstract: Controversy is vital in the pursuit of knowledge. Constructive dispute can drive intellectual growth and deepen understanding within a field. However, mutual respect, thorough engagement, and intellectual humility are necessary for productive exchanges. In this vein, I clarify in my response to Tom Palley's critique of my article that I did not argue against his claim regarding social conflict in Keynesian economics. However, I questioned whether social conflict is the sole ontological fault line, as Palley suggests. Additionally, I highlighted the distinction between Keynes' economics and Keynesian economics, challenging Palley's lumping them together as part of a liberal project. In conclusion, Palley's assertions regarding the absence of social conflict in Keynesian economics and its implications for economic laws lack foundation.

Keywords: Keynes; social conflict; paradigm shift (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: A14 B40 B51 E11 E12 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2024
New Economics Papers: this item is included in nep-his, nep-hme, nep-hpe and nep-pke
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/300689/1/1897332661.pdf (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:zbw:cessdp:300689

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in ZÖSS-Discussion Papers from University of Hamburg, Centre for Economic and Sociological Studies (CESS/ZÖSS) Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics ().