A Life of Utility: Rousseau's Non-expansive Commercial Society

在现代资本主义社会，劳动、消费和投资的经济自由被视为一项基本人权。然而，商业社会的发展也导致不平等加剧，环境污染，经济危机的风险更大。商业一定会带来腐败和不平等吗？商业在政治中扮演什么角色？发展一个强大的商业社会的危险和吸引力是什么？我提出的研究试图通过观察让-雅克·卢梭的政治哲学来回答这些问题，卢梭被认为是商业社会的“第一个也是最伟大的批评家”（拉斯穆森，2008）。我的研究有两个目的：通过揭示卢梭对商业的复杂批判，为卢梭研究中一个被忽视的领域做出贡献，并更好地理解商业在现代政治中的作用。为了实现这些目标，我的研究挑战了传统的阅读，将卢梭视为反对商业社会的经济专制的乌托邦式倡导者（Shklar, 1978; Starobinski,1979; frid<e:1>,1998）。我认为，卢梭对商业的态度比毫不含糊地拒绝要复杂得多。一方面，卢梭批评商业通过增加不平等和加深人际依赖来腐蚀社会。另一方面，卢梭认为商业在现代社会中是一种必要的、不可避免的实践。卢梭认为商业的主要制度和实践是现代社会不可或缺的一部分，比如私有产权、劳动分工和交换。卢梭主要反对的是一种建立在追求相对财富和不必要需求基础上的膨胀版商业社会。为了避免商业社会的腐败，卢梭将功利而不是利润作为人们经济生活的指导原则，以抑制不必要需求的增长。在此之后，我并没有把格卢梭和亚当·斯密看作智力上的对手，而是认为他们对商业社会的机制及其弱点有着相似的看法。他们的不同之处在于对经济增长的评估，根据卢梭的观点，经济增长总是伴随着不平等的政治成本。此外，由于卢梭对商业的双重理解，他的经济思想为研究商业在现代政治中的作用提供了很好的基础。通过卢梭政治经济学的棱镜，我们可以更好地理解现代社会物质进步的利弊。

The economic freedom of working, consuming, and investing is taken as an essential human right inmodern capitalist society. However, the development of commercial society also leads to an increase ininequality, environmental pollution, and a greater risk of economic crisis. Does commerce necessarilybring corruption and inequality? What role does commerce play in politics? What are the dangers, as wellas the appeals of developing a robust commercial society? My proposed research seeks to answer thesequestions by looking at the political philosophy of Jean-Jac Rousseau, who is regarded as the "first andgreatest critics" of commercial society (Rasmussen, 2008).My research has two aims: to contribute to a neglected field of Rousseau studies by revealing thesophistication of Rousseau's critique of commerce and to better understand the role of commerce inmodern politics. To achieve them, my research challenges the traditional reading which takes Rousseauas a utopian advocate of economic autarchy against commercial society (Shklar, 1978; Starobinski,1979;Fridén,1998). I argue that Rousseau's attitude towards commerce is more complicated than anunequivocal rejection. On the one hand, Rousseau criticizes commerce for corrupting society byincreasing inequality and deepening interpersonal dependence. On the other hand, Rousseau viewscommerce as a necessary and unavoidable practice in modern society. Rousseau regards the maininstitutions and practices of commerce as indispensable parts of modern society, such as privateproperty rights, division of labor, and exchanges. What Rousseau mainly opposes is an expansive versionof commercial society based on the pursuit of relative wealth and unnecessary needs. To avoid thecorruption of commercial society, Rousseau takes utility, instead of profit, as the guiding principle inpeople's economic life to restrain the growth of unnecessary needs. Following that, instead of viewingRousseau and Adam Smith as intellectual opponents, I argue that they share similar views on themechanism of commercial society as well as its weaknesses. Where they differ is the evaluation ofeconomic growth, which according to Rousseau is always accompanied by a political cost of inequality.Moreover, due to Rousseau's double-sided understanding of commerce, his economic thought provides agood basis to research the role of commerce in modern politics. Through the prism of Rousseau's politicaleconomy, one can better understand the advantages and disadvantages of material progress in modernsociety.