Rob: I followed the link and discover nothing pertaining to the honesty of either Wittgenstein or Keynes. Instead we have Russell putting the screws to Gilbert Ryle, rightly so, it would appear, for refusing, in his capacity as editor of Mind, to review Gellner's attack on ordinary language  philosophy, Words and Things.

You surely know that Wittgenstein was originally Russell's protégé.  I am not aware that there is any issue at all about Wittgenstein's honesty, first;  so why, second, should the fact that Keynes helped him raise any presumption of dishonesty with respect to Keynes himself?

How does the fact, as it appears to be, that soi-disant followers of  the later Wittgenstein , such as Ryle,  were cult-like and averse to criticism bear on the honesty of either Wittgenstein or Keynes?

Kevin Quinn


From: Societies for the History of Economics [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Rob Tye
Sent: Monday, June 02, 2014 2:01 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [SHOE] Keynes and Honesty

A tall and contentious ask, but I would be interested to get links to thoughts regarding Keynes and Honesty.

I am (sadly) both ignorant and biased on the matter - my bias arises from a very negative view of the influence of Wittgenstein on the intellectual world, and the strong circumstantial evidence that Wittgenstein was promoted by Keynes.

I have rather randomly come across a few negative views on Keynes' honesty, in Russell, Frankel, Rothbard and Keynes himself, but would be interested to try to round this matter out (especially regarding Keynes - Wittgenstein associations).

On the negative influence of Wittgenstein I recently found this series of letters to the Times a very useful read - especially the anonymous Times comment at the end. 

http://blog.talkingphilosophy.com/?p=6344

Rob Tye, York, UK