Bygo­nes are bygo­nes‘ might seem to be an ana­ly­tic truth, lack­ing any sub­stan­ti­ve con­tent. Yet, eco­no­mists think that, when they sta­te that bygo­nes are bygo­nes, they are asser­ting some­thing inte­res­t­ing and important. Fur­ther­mo­re, others would argue that the state­ment bygo­nes are bygo­nes‘, when read appro­pria­te­ly, is fal­se. By inter­ro­ga­ting the state­ment ‚bygo­nes are bygo­nes‘ we iden­ti­fy a num­ber of key issues rela­ting to ratio­nal choice theo­ry and the tre­at­ment of inten­ti­ons, habits and pro­mi­ses. The more phi­lo­so­phi­cal dis­cus­sion of the things that eco­no­mists say (and what they might mean) is par­ti­cu­lar­ly appro­pria­te in hono­ring Hart­mut Kli­emt, much of who­se work has brought phi­lo­so­phy and eco­no­mics into clo­ser proximity.