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