第四篇市場社會的交換學或經濟學

人的行为_第四篇_市场社会的交换学或经济学2010-06-16 09:18:56 来自: 无端(我将开口，同时感到空虚。) XIV. THE SCOPE AND METHOD OF CATALLACTICS 第 14 章 交换学的范围和方法 1. The Delimitation of Catallactic Problems 一、交换学的问题之界定 There have never been any doubts and uncertainties about the scope of economic science. Ever since people have been eager for a systematic study of economics or political economy, all have agreed that it is the task of this branch of knowledge to investigate the market phenomena, that is, the determination of the mutual exchange ratios of the goods and services negotiated on markets, their origin in human action and their effects upon later action. The intricacy of a precise definition of the scope of economics does not stem from uncertainty with regard to the orbit of the phenomena to be investigated. It is due to the fact that the attempts to elucidate the phenomena concerned must go beyond the range of the market and of market transactions. In order to conceive the market fully one is forced to study the action of hypothetical isolated individuals on one hand and to contrast the market system with an imaginary socialist commonwealth on the other hand. In studying interpersonal exchange one cannot avoid dealing with autistic exchange. But then it is no longer possible to define neatly the boundaries between the kind of action which is the proper field of economic science in the narrower sense, and other action. Economics widens its horizon and turns into a general science of all and every human action, into praxeology. The question emerges of how to distinguish precisely, within the broader field of general praxeology, a narrower orbit of specifically economic problems. 关于经济学的范围，从来没有任何疑问和不确定之点。自从人们渴望有一系统完整的经济学或政治经济学以来，大家都同意：这是研究市场现象这个知识部 门的工作，也即，测定在市场上商讨的财货与劳务的相互交换率、交换率在人的行为中的根源，以及它们对后继行为的影响。经济学范围的一个精确定义之复杂性， 不是发生于所要研究的现象轨道之不确定。而是由于：说明有关现象的那些尝试，必然越出市场和市场交易的范围。为要充份了解市场，我们不得不同时作两方面的 工作，一方面硏究假设的孤立状态的个人行为，一方面把市场制度与一假想的社会主义国相比较。在研究人际交换的时候，我们不免要涉及变态心理下的交换。这 时，我们就不可能在两类行为之间划出一条明确的界线，把那属于经济科学范围的行为与其它的行为分开。经济学在扩展它的视域，而成为处理人的一切行为的一门 科学，成为行为学。现在的问题是：在一般行为学这个较广泛的范围以内，我们如何正确地显出较狭窄的经济行为的特征。 The abortive attempts to solve this problem of a precise delimitation of the scope of catallactics have chosen as a criterion either the motives causing action or the goals which action aims at. But the variety and manifoldness of the motives instigating a mans action are without relevance for a comprehensive study of acting. Every action is motivated by the urge to remove a felt uneasiness. It does not matter for the science of action how people qualify this uneasiness from a physiological, psychological, or ethical point of view. It is the task of economics to deal with all commodity prices as they are really asked and paid in market transactions. It must not restrict its investigations p. 233 to the study of those prices which result or are likely to result from a conduct displaying attitudes to which psychology, ethics, or any other way of looking at human behavior would attach a definite label. The classification of actions according to their various motives may be momentous for psychology and may provide a yardstick for a moral evaluation; for economics it is inconsequential. Essentially the same is valid with regard to the endeavors to restrict the scope of economics to those actions which aim at supplying people with tangible material things of the external universe. Strictly speaking, people do not long for tangible goods as such, but for the services which these goods are fitted to render them. They want to attain the increment in well-being which these services are able to convey. But if this is so, it is not permissible to except from the orbit of “economic“ action those actions which remove uneasiness directly without the interposition of any tangible and visible things. The advice of a doctor, the instruction of a teacher, the recital of an artist, and other personal services are no less an object of economic studies than the architects plans for the construction of a building, the scientists formula for the production of a chemical compound, and the authors contribution to the publishing of a book. 解决这个问题的一些无效的企图，有的是把促起行为的那些动机作为判别的标准，有的是把行为所想达成的那些目的当作标准。但是，促起行为的那些动机 的差异性和多样性，对于行为的综合研究是不相干的。每一行为都是由于想消除不适之感而发动的。至于怎样才是不适之感，是从生理学、心理学，还是从伦理 的观点来说的呢？这个问题对于行为科学没有关系。经济学的任务，是处理市场交易中实际上叫出的和照付的所有的货物价格。它不可把它的硏究限之于某些价格。 依照行为的动机来把行为分类，在心理学上也许是重要的，在道德的评値上也许可提供一个准绳；但在经济学方面那就没有一致的理论。从根本上讲，凡是想把经济 学的范围限之于研究目的在供给有形财货的行为的企图，也同样是理论的不一致。严格地说，人们并不希求有形财货的本身，而是希求这些财货所能提供的服 务。他们所要的是，这些服务所能带来的福利之增加。但是，如果是如此，我们就不可以把那些不藉助于有形的财货而可直接消除不适之感的行为，排之于经济 的行为以外。一位医生的嘱咐、一位敎师的训话、一位艺术家的演奏，以及其它人身的服务之为经济研究的对象，不异于建筑师设计的蓝图、科学家发明的方程 式、著作家的出版物。 The subject matter of catallactics is all market phenomena with all their roots, ramifications, and consequences. It is a fact that people in dealing on the market are motivated not only by the desire to get food, shelter, and sexual enjoyment, but also by manifold “ideal“ urges. Acting man is always concerned both with “material“ and “ideal“ things. He chooses between various alternatives, no matter whether they are to be classified as material or ideal. In the actual scales of value material and ideal things are jumbled together. Even if it were feasible to draw a sharp line between material and ideal concerns, one must realize that every concrete action either aims at the realization both of material and ideal ends or is the outcome of a choice between something material and something ideal. 交换学的主题是一切巿场现象，包括它们的一切根源、一切分枝、和一切后果。在市场上做买卖的人们，不只是想取得衣、食、住和性欲的享乐，而且也有 多样理想的动机，这是个事实。行为人总是旣关心物质的东西，也关心理想的东西。他在种种替换物之间作选择，不管这些替换物是属于物质类或理想 类。在他内心的价値表上，物质的和理想的东西混杂在一起。即令我们可能划一明确界线，分别物质的和理想的事物，我们也得了解：每一具体行为，或者是为实现 物质的和理想的目的，或者是在某一物质的东西和某一理想的东西之间选择的结果。 Whether it is possible to separate neatly those actions which aim at the satisfaction of needs exclusively conditioned by mans physiological constitution from other “higher“ needs can be left undecided. But we must not overlook the fact that in reality no food is valued solely for its nutritive power and no garment or house solely for the protection it affords against cold weather and rain. It cannot be denied that the demand for goods is widely influenced by metaphysical, religious, and ethical considerations, by aesthetic value judgments, by customs, habits, prejudices, tradition, changing fashions, and many other things. To an economist who would try to restrict his investigations p. 234 to “material“ aspects only, the subject matter of inquiry vanishes as soon as he wants to catch it. 满足生理需要的行为与满足较高需要的行为能否截然划分这个问题，可以置之不理。但是，我们决不可忽视一个事实，即：在寞际上没有一样食物只是 就它的营养来评价的，也没有一件衣服或一幢房子，只是就它御寒或防风雨的效用来评价的，我们不能否认影响财货需求的有形而上的、宗敎的、和伦理的考虑，有 审美观念、风俗习惯、偏见、传统、经常在变的时髦、和其它等等。对于一位想把他的研究只限之于物质方面的经济学家，研究的主题，一到他想把握它的时 候，就马上消逝了。 All that can be contended is this: Economics is mainly concerned with the analysis of the determination of money prices of goods and services exchanged on the market. In order to accomplish this task it must start from a comprehensive theory of human action. Moreover, it must study not only the market phenomena, but no less the hypothetical conduct of an isolated man and of a socialist community. Finally, it must not restrict its investigations to those modes of action which in mundane speech are called “economic“ actions, but must deal also with actions which are in a loose manner of speech called “noneconomic.“ 我们所可主张的不过是：经济学主要地是在于分析巿场上交换的财货和劳务的货币价格之决定。为完成这个工作，那就必须从人的行为概括理论开始。 而且，不只是要硏究市场现象，还要同样地硏究假设的一个孤立的人的行为和一个社会主义社会的行为。最后，它不可以拘限于那些通俗称之为经济的行为研 究，也要研究那些所谓非经济的行为。非经济的这个形容词是很不谨严的。 The scope of praxeology, the general theory of human action, can be precisely defined and circumscribed. The specifically economic problems, the problems of economic action in the narrower sense, can only by and large be disengaged from the comprehensive body of praxeological theory. Accidental facts of the history of science of conventions play a role in all attempts to provide a definition of the scope of “genuine“ economics. 行为学，也即人的行为通论，其范围可以精密地界定。特别明确的经济问题，狭义的经济行为的问题，只能从行为学的综合体系中分出来。自古以来有许多人想给眞正的经济学确定一个范围，在他们的这些努力中，科学史上的偶然事件和社会的积习每每发生作用。 Not logical or epistemological rigor, but considerations of expediency and traditional convention make us declare that the field of catallactics or of economics in the narrower sense is the analysis of the market phenomena. This is tantamount to the statement: Catallactics is the analysis of those actions which are conducted on the basis of monetary calculation. Market exchange and monetary calculation are inseparably linked together. A market in which there is direct exchange only is merely an imaginary construction. On the other hand, money and monetary calculation are conditioned by the existence of the market. 我们说，交换学，或狭义经济学的范围，是对市场现象的分析。使我们这样说的，不是逻辑的或认识论的严密，而是权宜和传统习惯的考虑。这等于这样 说：交换学是分析那些基于金钱计算的行为。市场交换与金钱计算是连在一起不可分的。一个只有直接交换的市场，只是个想象的结构。另一方面，金钱与金钱的计 算必须市场的存在为条件。 It is certainly one of the tasks of economics to analyze the working of an imaginary socialist system of production. But access to this study too is possible only through the study of catallactics, the elucidation of a system in which there are money prices and economic calculation. 对一个假定的社会主义的生产制度加以分析，确是经济学的任务之一。但是，要接触这方面的研究，也只有藉助于交换学：交换学是对那种有金钱价格和经济计算的制度的解释。 The Denial of Economics 经济学的否认 There are doctrines flatly denying that there can be a science of economics. What is taught nowadays at most of the universities under the label of economics is practically a denial of it. 有些敎条直截了当地否认经济学这门学科的存在。目前在大多数大学里面，以经济学这个科目来讲授的东西，实际是对经济学的否定。 He who contests the existence of economics virtually denies that mans well-being is disturbed by any scarcity of external factors. Everybody, he implies, could enjoy the perfect satisfaction of all his p. 235 wishes, provided a reform succeeds in overcoming certain obstacles brought about by inappropriate man-made institutions. Nature is open-handed, it lavishly loads mankind with presents. Conditions could be paradisiac for an indefinite number of people. Scarcity is an artificial product of established practices. The abolition of such practices would result in abundance. 对经济学的存在持反对论的人，实际上就是否认人的幸福因外在因素的稀少而受干扰。他有这样的意思：假若有一种改革把不适当的人为建构所形成的某些 障碍成功地克服掉，任何人都可以享受他的一切欲望之完全满足。自然是慷慨的，它毫不吝惜地给人类丰富的赐予。生活环境对于无限的人口，也可以成为天 堂。物资的稀少是人为不臧的结果。把那些人为的建制都废除掉，就会大家富裕。 In the doctrine of Karl Marx and his followers scarcity is a historical category only. It is the feature of the primeval history of mankind which will be forever liquidated by the abolition of private property. Once mankind has effected the leap from the realm of necessity into the realm of freedom1 and thereby reached “the higher phase of communist society,“ there will be abundance and consequently it will be feasible to give “to each according to his needs.“2 There is in the vast flood of Marxian writings not the slightest allusion to the possibility that a communist society in its “higher phase“ might have to face a scarcity of natural factors of production. The fact of the disutility of labor is spirited away by the assertion that to work, under communism of course, will no longer be pain but pleasure, “the primary necessity of life.“3 The unpleasant experiences of the Russian “experiment“ are interpreted as caused by the capitalists hostility, by the fact that socialism in one country only is not yet perfect and therefore has not yet been able to bring about the “higher phase,“ and, more recently, by the war. 在马克斯和其门徒们的敎条中，稀少只是一个历史的范畴。它是人类史原始期的特征。这一特征将随私有财产制的废除而永归消灭。人类一旦从艰困的 境界跃进自由的境界1【人类一旦脱离必然王国，跃进自由王国】，因而达到较高层面的共产社会【较高阶段的共产主义】，那就实现了富裕，而可以 实行各取所需2了。在多得如洪水般的马克斯主义著作中，从来没有说到，在较高层面的共产社会可能遇到自然资源稀少的问题，不仅没有这样说到，连一 点这样的暗示也没有。至于劳动的负效用（disutility）则用下面的说词欺骗掉：工作，在共产制度下，再也不是痛苦，而是快乐，是人生的基本需 要3。俄国试验的苦痛经验被解释为：由于资本主义的敌对，由于社会主义不能只在一国圆满实行，所以还不能进到较高层面【较高阶段】，到了最 近，则又说由于战争。 Then there are the radical inflationists as represented, for example, by Proudhon and by Ernest Solvay. In their opinion scarcity is created by the artificial checks upon credit expansion and other methods of increasing the quantity of money in circulation, enjoined upon the gullible public by the selfish class interests of bankers and other exploiters. They recommend unlimited public spending as the panacea. 于是，就有了一些急进的膨胀主义者，例如 Proudhon、Ernest Solvay，以及现代美国的功能财政的敎条，都可代表。在这些人们的见解中，稀少是由于人为的对信用扩张，以及其它增加货币流通量的方法所加的 那些限制造成的，是由于银行家和其它的剥削者，基于自私的阶级利益而加害于可欺的大众。这些人们把无限制的政府支出当作万灵药来推荐。 【英文第四版无此段。】 以富裕的经济来代替所谓人为的稀少经济，在美国作这种主张的人，以曾任副总统的 Henry A. Wallacc 为最激烈。他有过空前的、最庞大的计划，要用政府命令来统制主要食物和原料的供给。他将因此而在历史上留名这种庞大计划的创作者。可 是，这样的历史记录，无论如何不会损伤他那种主张的通俗性。Such is the myth of potential plenty and abundance. Economics may leave it to the historians and psychologists to explain the popularity of this kind of wishful thinking and indulgence in daydreams. All that economics has to say about such idle talk is that economics deals with the problems man has to face on account of the fact that his life is conditioned by natural factors. It deals with action, i.e., with the conscious endeavors to remove as far as possible felt uneasiness. It has nothing to assert with regard to the state of affairs in an unrealizable and for human reason even inconceivable universe of unlimited opportunities. In such a world, it may be admitted, there will be no law of value, no scarcity, and no economic problems. These things will be p. 236 absent because there will be no choices to be made, no action, and no tasks to be solved by reason. Beings which would have thrived in such a world would never have developed reasoning and thinking. If ever such a world were to be given to the descendants of the human race, these blessed beings would see their power to think wither away and would cease to be human. For the primary task of reason is to cope consciously with the limitations imposed upon man by nature, is to fight against scarcity. Acting and thinking man is the product of a universe of scarcity in which whatever well-being can be attained is the prize of toil and trouble, of conduct popularly called economic. 这都是神话，可能的富裕神话。这样一厢情愿的想法和自我陶醉的白日梦，为什么如此受人欢迎？对于这个问题，经济学可以不管，让历史家和心理学 家去解释。经济学所不得不讲的只是：因为人的生活受限于自然因素，所以他必定遇着一些问题，经济学就是处理这些问题的。它处理人的行为，也即，处理那些尽 可能的消除不适之感的自觉的努力。关于那些不可实现的事象，甚至为人的理知所不能想象的无限机会的宇宙，在经济学里面没有什么可说的。如果眞有这样一个世 界，那里就没有什么价値法则、没有稀少，也就没有经济问题。这些事情都没有，因为那里没有什么选择要作、没有行为，也没有要用理知来解决的事情。繁殖在这 样一个世界的东西，决不会发展出理知和思考。如果我们能为我们的子孙造就这样一个世界，那些受赐的子孙将会体验他们的思考力之退化而渐渐变得不成其为人。 因为理知的基本任务是要对抗自然加给人类的限制，是要和稀少抗争。行为和思想的人，是稀少世界的产物。在这个世界里面，凡是可得到的福利，都是辛 劳和困苦的奖品，都是通常所说的经济行为的奖品。 - 1 Cf. Engels, Herrn Eugen Duhrings Umwalzung der Wissenschaft (7th ed. Stuttgart, 1910), p.306. 1 参考 Engels, Herrn Eugen Duhrings Umwalzung der Wissenschaft (7th ed. Stuttgart, 1910), p.306. 2 Cf. Karl Marx, Zur Kritik des sozialdemokratischen Parteiprogramms von Gotha, ed. Kreibich (Reichenberg, 1920), p. 17. 2 参考 Karl Marx, Zur Kritik des sozialdemokratischen Parteiprogramms von Gotha, ed. Kreibich (Reichenberg, 1920), p. 17. 3 Cf. ibid. 3 参考上书。 XIV. THE SCOPE AND METHOD OF CATALLACTICS 第 14 章 交换学的范围和方法 2. The Method of Imaginary Constructions 二、想象建构的方法 The specific method of economics is the method of imaginary constructions. 经济学特有的方法，是想象建构的方法。 This method is the method of praxeology. That it has been carefully elaborated and perfected in the field of economic studies in the narrower sense is due to the fact that economics, at least until now, has been the best-developed part of praxeology. Everyone who wants to express an opinion about the problems commonly called economic takes recourse to this method. The employment of these imaginary constructions is, to be sure, not a procedure peculiar to the scientific analysis of these problems. The layman in dealing with them resorts to the same method. But while the laymans constructions are more or less confused and muddled, economics is intent upon elaborating them with the utmost care, scrupulousness, and precision, and upon examining their conditions and assumptions critically. 这个方法是行为学的方法。它在狭义的经济研究范围内，已经是很精巧周到了，这是由于经济学已经是行为学最发展的一部份，至少就现在讲，是如此。任 何人，只要他想表示关于通常所说的经济问题，就得求助于这个方法。这些想象的建构之利用，诚然不是这些问题的科学分析所特有的程序。外行人处理这些问题， 也用同样的方法。但是，外行人的建构或多或少是混乱含糊的，经济学则是以最审慎、最认眞、最谨严的态度来精心制作它们，并以批评的眼光来检视它们的些条 件和假设。 An imaginary construction is a conceptual image of a sequence of events logically evolved from the elements of action employed in its formation. It is a product of deduction, ultimately derived from the fundamental category of action, the act of preferring and setting aside. In designing such an imaginary construction the economist is not concerned with the question of whether or not it depicts the conditions of reality which he wants to analyze. Nor does he bother about the question of whether or not such a system as his imaginary construction posits could be conceived as really existent and in operation. Even imaginary constructions which are inconceivable, self-contradictory, or unrealizable can render useful, even indispensable services in the comprehension of reality, provided the economist knows how to use them properly. 一个想象的建构，是事件连续关系的概念典型【是事件序列的概念图像】，而这些事件是从行为的一些元素必然【合乎逻辑地】发展出来的。它是演铎的结 果，最后溯源于行为的基本元范取和舍的行为。经济学家在设计这样一个想象建构的时候，他并不关心它是不是描述他所想分析的那些实际情况。他也不烦心于 他的想象建构所布置的这个制度能否视为实际存在而又运作。即令他的想象的建构是难于置信的、自相矛盾的，或不能实现的，只要经济学家知道如何适当地使用它 们，它们对于实际的了解也能提供有用的、甚至不可少的帮助。 The method of imaginary constructions is justified by its success. Praxeology cannot, like the natural sciences, base its teachings upon laboratory experiments and sensory perception of external objects. p. 237 It had to develop methods entirely different from those of physics and biology. It would be a serious blunder to look for analogies to the imaginary constructions in the field of the natural sciences. The imaginary constructions of praxeology can never be confronted with any experience of things external and can never be appraised from the point of view of such experience. Their function is to serve man in a scrutiny which cannot rely upon his senses. In confronting the imaginary constructions with reality we cannot raise the question of whether