There was a period of his life (1925-30) when Keynes came to wonder not if it was possible to reform capitalism, but if it was worth to reform it. Keynes thought that ” the essential characteristic of capitalism” was “the dependence upon an intense appeal to the money-making instincts of individuals”, and despised them. However, economists usually think that homo economicus is an abstraction characteristic of their discipline, not a true psychological description on which to base an ethical judgement. Why did Keynes, a foremost economist, side on this issue with laypeople and not with his colleagues? The question arises if he was somewhat traditional in his moral evaluation of capitalism, and naive and out of date in his sociological understanding of it. Analysis of his writings on this issue, and comparison with those by Schumpeter, Knight, and Max Weber, leads to a positive answer to it.