Publication: Fundamentos teóricos de la controversia entre Hayek y KeyneS. Dos visiones acerca del orden económico y la historia
Loading...
Files
Official URL
Full text at PDC
Publication Date
2017-01-16
Authors
Advisors (or tutors)
Editors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Universidad Complutense de Madrid
Citations
Exportar
Abstract
El presente trabajo pretende investigar la controversia entre Hayek y Keynes desde la concepción que cada uno tiene sobre la Historia. Para ello ha sido necesario, en primer lugar, precisar el debate conceptual en el marco de la Historia del Pensamiento Económico donde se tratan problemas teóricos como el funcionamiento del sistema de precios, la teoría del valor, la teoría sobre el interés y el capital, la Ley de Say, el papel de las expectativas y el funcionamiento de los mercados organizados, por destacar los elementos más relevantes. Dichos conceptos ayudan a comprender la aportación teórica de Hayek y Keynes acerca de las causas y remedios de las crisis económicas iluminando a su vez sobre la disyuntiva moderna entre sociedad civil e intervención gubernamental. En segundo término he ahondado en las influencias filosóficas y metodológicas que nutren dos visiones diferentes de la Historia —aunque con puntos de encuentro—, la de Hayek predominantemente praxeológica, mientras que en Keynes aparece más específica y concreta. Concluyo que esta visión o idea de la Historia tiene una influencia significativa en la postura que asume cada autor en cuanto al papel desempeñado por las reglas de conducta y la capacidad de autorregulación de un orden moderno y complejo. El marco histórico fundamental es el período de entreguerras (1919-1938) caracterizado por la inestabilidad institucional, el desorden monetario, la Gran Depresión y la pérdida de hegemonía del Reino Unido. La disputa propiamente dicha entre Hayek y Keynes fue muy breve, ocurrió entre los años 1931 y 1932, cuando se suceden una serie de réplicas y correspondencia entre ambos que Keynes zanjó delegando en Piero Sraffa y R.F. Kahn la continuación de la batalla frente a Hayek. Keynes prefirió centrarse en los conceptos que emplearía en la Teoría General “en lugar de perder el tiempo en controversias”1. Para Keynes la posición de Hayek a grandes rasgos era la de otro exponente de lo que él denominaba la “ortodoxia” que asumía tácitamente el cumplimiento de la Ley de Say...
The present work aims to investigate the dispute between Hayek and Keynes from the different perspective each has about History. For that purpose it is necessary, at first, to clarify the conceptual debate in the framework of the History of Economic Thought through their theories about the price mechanism, the value theory, the concept of capital and interest, Say’s Law, and the role of expectations and organized markets, highlighting the most relevant elements. These concepts help us to understand the theoretical contributions of Hayek and Keynes to the reasons and remedies of the economic crisis and can shed light on the modern dilemma between civil society and government intervention. In second term, I delve into the philosophical and methodological aspects that nurture a vision of History more praxeological, in Hayek’s case, and more historically specific, in the case of Keynes. The main conclusion is the importance of these influences in the philosophical stance that each assumes in regard to the rules of conduct, the spontaneous order and the capacity for self-regulation in a modern and complex order. The historical context is essentially the interwar period characterized by institutional instability, monetary disorder, the Great Depression and the loss of hegemony of the United Kingdom. The Hayek and Keynes dispute was very brief, it occurred between the years 1931 and 1932, and is dotted with a series of replicas and correspondence between both authors. Keynes settled the debate by delegating to P. Sraffa and R. F. Kahn the continuity of the battle against Hayek. Keynes preferred to focus on the concepts that he would use in the General Theory "instead of wasting time in controversies"3. For Keynes, Hayek’s position was like another exponent of what he termed the "orthodoxy" that tacitly assumed the compliance of Say’s Law...
The present work aims to investigate the dispute between Hayek and Keynes from the different perspective each has about History. For that purpose it is necessary, at first, to clarify the conceptual debate in the framework of the History of Economic Thought through their theories about the price mechanism, the value theory, the concept of capital and interest, Say’s Law, and the role of expectations and organized markets, highlighting the most relevant elements. These concepts help us to understand the theoretical contributions of Hayek and Keynes to the reasons and remedies of the economic crisis and can shed light on the modern dilemma between civil society and government intervention. In second term, I delve into the philosophical and methodological aspects that nurture a vision of History more praxeological, in Hayek’s case, and more historically specific, in the case of Keynes. The main conclusion is the importance of these influences in the philosophical stance that each assumes in regard to the rules of conduct, the spontaneous order and the capacity for self-regulation in a modern and complex order. The historical context is essentially the interwar period characterized by institutional instability, monetary disorder, the Great Depression and the loss of hegemony of the United Kingdom. The Hayek and Keynes dispute was very brief, it occurred between the years 1931 and 1932, and is dotted with a series of replicas and correspondence between both authors. Keynes settled the debate by delegating to P. Sraffa and R. F. Kahn the continuity of the battle against Hayek. Keynes preferred to focus on the concepts that he would use in the General Theory "instead of wasting time in controversies"3. For Keynes, Hayek’s position was like another exponent of what he termed the "orthodoxy" that tacitly assumed the compliance of Say’s Law...
Description
Tesis inédita de la Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Empresariales, Departamento de Historia e Instituciones Económicas I, leída el 10-12-2015