论文部分内容阅读
我们还记得,在2004年6月6日《文汇报》上,曾经刊登一位据介绍是省部级干部进修班的主讲教员的讲稿,题为《驾驭经济学的理论支点》,洋洋洒洒地宣传所谓“经济人假定”,其核心内容是“把人看作是理性的利己主义者”,“人如果不自私,就不会有劳动积极性,政府也无法通过政策调节经济。”作者声称:“人为财死,鸟为食亡。别看这只是一句俗语,却是千百年来人们对自身经济行为的总结,揭示的是一个浅白而又深刻的经济学原理。”其为私有制辩护,为私有化张目,意甚明显。他还由这个“经济人假定”推导出“高薪未必一定养廉,但低薪肯定导致腐败”等结论。本刊在2004年第9期曾发表《向高级干部灌输什么样的经济学?》予以驳诘。最近,此人又发表《对当前国内经济学界几个争论问题的看法》的长文,重申“人是理性的,也是自私的”等主张,还联系到《中国共产党党内监督条例》,说“此条例的出发点,无疑是‘经济人假定’。”人的本性果真是自私的吗?究竟应该怎样运用历史唯物主义观点来看待人性问题?这里,我们发表两篇经济学家的文章,以飨读者,以正视听。
We still remember that in the Wen Wei Po on June 6, 2004, a speech on the introduction was made by a faculty member who was introduced to provincial and ministerial-level cadre training courses titled “The Theoretical Fulcrum of Managing Economics,” and eloquently propagandized the so-called “ The hypothesis of ”economic man“ is that its core content is ”to regard people as rational egoists.“ ”If people are not selfish, there will be no enthusiasm for work and the government will not be able to regulate the economy through policies.“ The author claims: ”Artificial Do not look at this is just a saying, but it is thousands of years of people’s own economic behavior summary, revealing a simple and profound economic principles. “The defense of private ownership for the Privatization of the title, the intention is obvious. He also deduced from this ”hypothesis of economic man“ that ”higher salaries may not necessarily support the poor, but low salaries certainly lead to corruption.“ The magazine published in the 9th issue of 2004 ”what kind of economics to incumbent cadres?“ Refuted. Recently, this man published a long article entitled ”Views on Several Controversies in Current Domestic Economies,“ reiterating that ”people are rational and selfish.“ They also linked the ”Regulations for the Supervision of the Communist Party of China within the Party,“ saying ”The starting point of this regulation is undoubtedly the hypothesis of“ economic man. ”" Is human nature really selfish? How should we use the view of historical materialism to treat human nature? Here we publish two articles by economists飨 readers, to face hearing.