Keynes and Knight on uncertainty: peas in a pod or chalk and cheese?
Mark D Packard,
Per Bylund and
Brent B Clark
Cambridge Journal of Economics, 2021, vol. 45, issue 5, 1099-1125
Abstract:
For many years, the ideas of Knight and Keynes have been widely understood to overlap greatly and they are presumed to have developed notions of uncertainty that deeply intersect, both describing a state where outcomes have non-probabilistic likelihoods. Furthermore, even their political philosophies are historically somewhat homogenised, both considered ‘liberals’. We critically review the historical records and writings of these key scholars with the purpose of dehomogenising their political philosophies, scientific epistemologies and their famous works on uncertainty, published in the same year—1921. We show that neither Keynes nor Knight has been considered fairly by history. Keynes, far from a liberal, was a political socialist who supposed that economic futures could be predicted rationally via deduced probabilities (in an abstract sense) and concluded that expert economists could and should engage in economic planning. Knight, in stark contrast, was something of a radical liberal, holding uncertainty and paradox to be the permeating fact of human existence, which implied, for Knight, significant political and economic complexities far beyond any planner. In short, Knight and Keynes held to radically different philosophic assumptions and, consequently, derived distinctive theories of uncertainty, much further apart than previously supposed. By more fully and accurately placing their ideas within the context of their ideological priors, we gain a stronger sense of how they truly understood the mechanics of economies.
Keywords: History of economic thought; John Maynard Keynes; Frank Knight; uncertainty (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2021
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (2)
Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/cje/beab025 (application/pdf)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
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:oup:cambje:v:45:y:2021:i:5:p:1099-1125.
Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
https://academic.oup.com/journals
Access Statistics for this article
Cambridge Journal of Economics is currently edited by Jacqui Lagrue
More articles in Cambridge Journal of Economics from Cambridge Political Economy Society Oxford University Press, Great Clarendon Street, Oxford OX2 6DP, UK.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Oxford University Press ().