Dear all,

Last month we enjoyed the first ESHET-JSHET conference at Nice, France, when
I happened to read a paper entitled "Social Philosophy in Interwar Cambridge
--- Seeking the Cure for the Malaise of the Market Economy". My main theme 
was
as follows:

  What is shared by the leading economists in the inter-war Cambridge is the
emphasis placed on the malaise to be seen in the market society and the
issue of how it could be removed (in sharp contrast with Hume and Hayek, who
emphatically sing the praises of the market society). With their diagnosis
of the imperfection of individuals, they concur in the opinion that a
laissez-faire policy can do little for the improvement of the market
society, arguing that excessive inequality of income distribution and
excessive unemployment are a malaise of that society which must and can be
cured by the state. Based on this type of social philosophy, they
endeavoured to construct their own economic theories, which are, therefore,
policy-oriented. And we can say that this stance follows Marshall's stance
on economics with a view to the good of society.

* I am speaking of Keynes, Robertson, Pigou, and Hawtrey. We might arrange
them in political spectrum as follows.

Socialism <-----Pigou------Hawtrey-----Keynes &
Roberston ------------------------------>Laissez-faire

Toshiaki Hirai