Ethics in Exchange and Reciprocity
Ethics in Exchange and Reciprocity
复制标题
交换与互惠的道德规范
DOI：
10.1007/978-3-642-56836-7_4
复制
发表时间：
2001
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
M. Nishibe
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
M. Nishibe
经济学学术有着跨越两个多世纪的传统。纵观这段漫长的历史，甚至到今天，对于“经济”一词的本质含义，存在着截然不同的观点，存在着可以被认为是形式意义的“稀缺”，以及可以被称为实质意义的“生殖”(Menger 1923，ch。4；Leontief 1928；Polanyi 1957,1971,1977)。正如罗宾斯(1932)所明确定义的那样，“经济”的节约或正式含义源于目的和手段的形成理性关系中经济资源的稀缺性。相比之下，正如门格在其晚年努力描绘的那样，“经济”的技术或实质意义，以及波兰尼后来重新发现的1，侧重于在特定社会制度下发生的人与自然环境之间的新陈代谢相互作用所产生的人类经济的生殖属性。斯密、李嘉图和马克思等经典经济学家在研究经济社会时所关注的正是经济社会的后一种含义。
Economic scholarship possesses a tradition that spans more than two centuries. Throughout this long history, and indeed still today, there have coexisted distinctly differing views on the essential meaning of the word ‘ economic’ There is what can be considered the formal meaning - “scarce”, and what can be called the substantive meaning — “reproductive” (Menger 1923, ch. 4; Leontief 1928; Polanyi 1957, 1971, 1977). The economizing, or formal, meaning of ‘ economic’, as clearly defined by Robbins (1932), stems from the scarcity of economic resources in the formatively rational relations of ends and means. By contrast, the technical, or Substantive, meaning of ‘ economic’, as Menger in his last days endeavored to depict, and Polanyi subsequently rediscovered1, focuses on the reproductive properties of human economy arising from the metabolic interactions between humans and natural environments which occur under particular social institutions. It is this latter meaning of ‘ economic’ that is of concern to classical economists such as Smith, Ricardo and Marx in their studies on economic societies.