On the Need for All Academics, Especially Philosophers and Economists, to Bypass Pp.112-118 and Pp.264-273 of C. Misak’s 2020 Biography of Ramsey Dealing with J M Keynes, Due to the Presence of Far, Far Too Many Errors of Omission and Commission : The Keynes-Townshend Correspondence of 1937-38 Shows that Ramsey’s 1922 Critique of Keynes Had No Influence on Keynes Whatsoever

C. Misak’s 2020 biography of Ramsey has major errors in it, as regards the influence of Ramsey on Keynes with respect to the issue of probability, as well as her completely unsubstantiated retelling of the R B Braithwaite myth that an 18 year old Frank Ramsey showed up at Cambridge University and published a small, three page, unrefereed critical note in the January, 1922 issue of the Cambridge Magazine that supposedly demolished and destroyed Keynes’s logical theory of probability.Ramsey had no idea about what Keynes’s logical theory of probability was. For instance, Ramsey had no idea that Keynes’s logical, objective probability relations are practically identical to logical, objective similarity relations. Ramsey also had no idea that Keynes’s "mysterious non numerical probabilities", that did not obey the rules of additivity, complementarity, and linearity of the precise mathematical calculus of probability were, in fact, interval valued probabilities that Ramsey did not understand were non additive and imprecise.It appears that Misak has been far too influenced by Braithwaite and his followers, such as H.D. Mellor, I. Hacking, and D. Gillies, and simply accepted their unsupportable and unsubstantiated claims that Ramsey did destroy and demolish Keynes’s theory, a theory that is the backbone of Keynes’s 1936 General Theory.Apparently, it appears that academics are already accepting Misak’s myth about Keynes and Ramsey as of early 2021