4 - The methodology of John Kenneth Galbraith

Summary

Evidently an economic inquiry which occupies itself exclusively with the movements of this consistent, elemental human nature under given, stable institutional conditions – such as is the case with the current hedonistic economics – can reach statical results alone; since it makes abstraction from those elements that make for anything but a statical result.

Thorstein Veblen (1909: 628–9)

In considering the image of modern industrial society, one must have clearly in mind two factors that act strongly and persistently to distort the economist's view of that reality. The first of these distorting factors is the very great inclination to think of the ultimate subject matter with which we deal in static terms … The second factor that distorts understanding is the very great social and political convenience – or so it seems – of the wrong image of economic society.

J. K. Galbraith (1979a: 3–5)

By today's standards many practicing economists would view Galbraith as an economic sociologist rather than as a technical economist. Preferring prose to algebra his efforts are viewed by many as providing insight and challenge, but ultimately he stands accused of lacking rigor and empirical grounding. Like Veblen, Galbraith is often mistakenly regarded as lying outside the purview of economics proper. This is unfair and overlooks significant aspects of Galbraith's contributions and approach. Galbraith's approach reflected his analytical focus. That is to say, Galbraith largely rejected the methods of mainstream economics as inappropriate for the study of historical and institutional change.