ABSTRACT
Interest in methodological problems has so often been branded as a sign of theoretical frustration that the subject has practically vanished from the field of economic discussion. The silence which for a number of years surrounds this range of questions is so persistent as to become conspicuous. It is particularly notable in view of the fact that since the advent of the new Cambridge School, the methods of theorizing have undergone fundamental transformation. 1 Yet it would seem to be the form of analysis rather than the material content of his theories which imprint upon so many a prominent member of our scientific community the unmistakable mark of a “Cambridge economist.” A show-down between the Cambridge (or rather the neo-Cambridge) and the orthodox type of theory, if it ever comes, must be fought out on methodological grounds. The solution of the fundamental issue cannot be advanced through persistent but dispersed scrimmages concerning such questions as equality of Saving and Investment, the significance of the so-called “Multiplier”, and the like.
