Patinkin on Keynes and Meitzer

<p>Don Patinkin's discussion of alternative interpretations of Keyne's <em>General Theory</em> gave considerable weight to an author's motivation, particularly mine. Patinkin also restates his view that the <em>General Theory</em> offers a short-run disequilibrium approach. I suggest that textual interpretation in economics should not consider motives because better methods are available and are now used. I propose three standards. Applying these standards, I find little support for Patinkin's interpretation of the <em>General Theory</em>. Although my interpretation better meets the three standards, I conclude that the <em>General Theory</em> does not have a single correct interpretation.</p>