PREFACE
This 調書をとる／予約する is 主として 演説（する）／住所d to my fellow 経済学者s. I hope
that it will be intelligible to others. But its main 目的 is
to を取り引きする difficult questions of theory, and only in the
second place with the 使用／適用s of this theory to practice.
For if 正統派の 経済的なs is at fault, the error is to be 設立する
not in the superstructure, which has been 築くd with 広大な／多数の／重要な care
for 論理（学）の consistency, but in a 欠如（する） of clearness and of
generality in the pre 行方不明になるs. Thus I cannot 達成する my 反対する of
説得するing 経済学者s to re-診察する 批判的に 確かな of their
basic 仮定／引き受けることs except by a 高度に abstract argument and also
by much 論争. I wish there could have been いっそう少なく of the
latter. But I have thought it important, not only to explain my
own point of 見解（をとる）, but also to show in what 尊敬（する）・点s it 出発／死s
from the 勝つ／広く一帯に広がるing theory. Those, who are 堅固に wedded to
what I shall call 'the classical theory', will fluctuate, I
推定する／予想する, between a belief that I am やめる wrong and a belief that
I am 説 nothing new. It is for others to 決定する if either
of these or the third 代案／選択肢 is 権利. My 議論の的になる
passages are 目的（とする）d at 供給するing some 構成要素 for an answer; and
I must ask forgiveness If, in the 追跡 of sharp distinctions,
my 論争 is itself too keen. I myself held with 有罪の判決
for many years the theories which I now attack, and I am not, I
think, ignorant of their strong points.
The 事柄s at 問題／発行する are of an importance which cannot be
誇張するd. But, if my explanations are 権利, it is my fellow
経済学者s, not the general public, whom I must first 納得させる.
At this 行う／開催する／段階 of the argument the general public, though welcome
at the 審議, are only eavesdroppers at an 試みる／企てる by an
経済学者 to bring to an 問題／発行する the 深い 相違s of opinion
between fellow 経済学者s which have for the time 存在 almost
destroyed the practical 影響（力） of 経済的な theory, and will,
until they are 解決するd, continue to do so.
The relation between this 調書をとる／予約する and my Treatise on Money
[JMK vols. v and vi], which I published five years ago,
is probably clearer to myself than it will be to others; and what
in my own mind is a natural 進化 in a line of thought which
I have been 追求するing for several years, may いつかs strike the
reader as a 混乱させるing change of 見解（をとる）. This difficulty is not made
いっそう少なく by 確かな changes in terminology which I have felt
compelled to make. These changes of language I have pointed out
in the course of the に引き続いて pages; but the general
関係 between the two 調書をとる／予約するs can be 表明するd 簡潔に as
follows. When I began to 令状 my Treatise on Money I was
still moving along the 伝統的な lines of regarding the
影響（力） of money as something so to speak separate from the
general theory of 供給（する） and 需要・要求する. When I finished it, I had
made some 進歩 に向かって 押し進めるing 通貨の theory 支援する to
becoming a theory of 生産（高） as a whole. But my 欠如（する） of
emancipation from preconceived ideas showed itself in what now
seems to me to be the 優れた fault of the theoretical parts
of that work (すなわち, 調書をとる／予約するs III and IV), that I failed to 取引，協定
完全に with the 影響s of changes in the level of
生産（高）. My いわゆる '根底となる equations were an instantaneous
picture taken on the 仮定／引き受けること of a given 生産（高）. They 試みる／企てるd
to show how, assuming the given 生産（高）, 軍隊s could develop
which 伴う／関わるd a 利益（をあげる）-disequilibrium, and thus 要求するd a
change in the level of 生産（高）. But the dynamic 開発, as
際立った from the instantaneous picture, was left incomplete and
極端に 混乱させるd. This 調書をとる／予約する, on the other 手渡す, has 発展させるd
into what is まず第一に／本来 a 熟考する／考慮する of the 軍隊s which 決定する
changes in the 規模 of 生産（高） and 雇用 as a whole; and,
whilst it is 設立する that money enters into the 経済的な 計画／陰謀 in
an 必須の and peculiar manner, technical 通貨の 詳細（に述べる） 落ちるs
into the background. A 通貨の economy, we shall find, is
essentially one in which changing 見解（をとる）s about the 未来 are
有能な of 影響（力）ing the 量 of 雇用 and not 単に
its direction. But our method of analysing the 経済的な behaviour
of the 現在の under the 影響（力） of changing ideas about the
未来 is one which depends on the interaction of 供給（する） and
需要・要求する, and is in this way linked up with our 根底となる theory of value. We
are thus led to a more general theory, which 含むs the
classical theory with which we are familiar, as a special 事例／患者.
The writer of a 調書をとる／予約する such as this, treading along unfamiliar
paths, is 極端に 扶養家族 on 批評 and conversation if he
is to 避ける an undue 割合 of mistakes. It is astonishing
what foolish things one can 一時的に believe if one thinks too
long alone, 特に in 経済的なs (along with the other moral
sciences), where it is often impossible to bring one's ideas to a
conclusive 実験（する） either formal or 実験の. In this 調書をとる／予約する, even
more perhaps than in 令状ing my Treatise on Money, I have
depended on the constant advice and 建設的な 批評 of Mr
R.F. Kahn. There is a 広大な／多数の／重要な 取引，協定 in this 調書をとる／予約する which would not
have taken the 形態／調整 it has except at his suggestion. I have also
had much help from Mrs Joan Robinson, Mr R.G. Hawtrey and Mr R.F.
Harrod, who have read the whole of the proof-sheets. The 索引
has been 収集するd by Mr D. M. Bensusan-Butt of King's College,
Cambridge.
The composition of this 調書をとる／予約する has been for the author a long
struggle of escape, and so must the reading of it be for most
readers if the author's 強襲，強姦 upon them is to be successful,ｾa struggle of escape from habitual 方式s
of thought and 表現. The ideas which are here 表明するd so
laboriously are 極端に simple and should be obvious. The
difficulty lies, not in the new ideas, but in escaping from the
old ones, which ramify, for those brought up as most of us have
been, into every corner of our minds.
J.M. KEYNES
13 December 1935