政治领域中的人性——经济人假设评析

经济人假设中对理性的理解拓宽了政治学的理性概念 ,为分析人的行为和制度分析提供了一致的基础。心理学、社会学、哲学均对经济人假设提出批评 ,自利和理性并非人的永恒本性 ,也不应把人的一切行为都归结为趋利避害 ,人的理性能力也是有限的。政治学家则认为与经济活动相比 ,政治活动有更大的不确定性 ,人的政治行为难以全部理性化。     

Reflections on rational choice—The existence of systematic irrationality

The behavioral challenge to the rational choice paradigm is oriented toward individual decision-making. Behavioral irrationality does not mean chaos. Most irrational behavior involves the exercise of reasoning. In reality, decision makers do not behave with full knowledge and/or optimal computational power in pursuit of maximizing expected utility. Besides reviewing critiques to the rationality paradigm for judgments and preferences and exploring the impact of culture on people's economic behavior, this paper is the first to call the attention of researchers to the phenomenon of systemic irrationality. Irrationality may exist at the aggregate or societal level, a conclusion based on the observation that large segments of the population are incapable of making decisions in accord with traditional rationality—groups such as those who have a psychiatric disorder, those who are taking medications, those with limited intelligence, those from the lower social classes, children and adolescents, and the elderly. Even those who are not included in the aforementioned groups, but who take medications for medical conditions may have their decision-making impaired to some extent. Therefore, it is argued that rationality in economic decision-making may be the exception rather than the norm.     

传统生产力定义的合理性批判

传统的生产力定义有其历史的合理性.随着社会的发展,这种定义的局限性日益显示出来.第一,误导了人类征服自然和改造自然的目的.第二,仅仅从人与自然的关系去理解生产力.第三,对人与自然关系的理解过于狭隘.     

关于我国转轨期所有制变化的历史“合理性”考察

改革开放以来我国经济制度变迁的一个显著特征，就是国有制经济比重下降而非国有制经济比重的上升。这一变化是否具有“合理性”？一直是人们关注的焦点问题，因为这一重大例题直接涉及到对整个市场化改革成败得失的基本判断。本文对此进行了综合考察，实证分析显示出，所有制结构的变动与市场化的进程、要素使用效率尤其是资本使用效率的提高、年均经济增长的高速水平之间，具有明显的正相关关系，展示出了在促进社会生产力发展上的“合理性”。关于所有制变化所导致的经济主体凭借财产所有权获得收益是否具有“合理性”的问题，本文构建了一个基于契约论和供求论相结合的解析框架进行了有说服务的解释。     

人类理想：自由探索与遵循规范的统一

人类理想是在实践中产生的,它是面向未来的人类理性的构想,人类对理想的追求是人类区别于动物世界、并使自身高出动物世界、体现人之崇高性和尊严的体现,也是人的自由性与目的性相统一的体现,但理想本身则是人类自由探索与追求规范的统一。这是由人类理想的实践本性和理想在实践中保持开放性和常新性决定的;同时,人类实践的内在尺度与外在尺度也使得人类的理想追求必然表现为对自身活动的目的性追求和遵循外在规范的统一;另外,人的异化和功利主义追求导致了人类生活根基的动摇和意义世界的缺失,人类需要重建我们的理想和意义世界,以此才能规范人类的理想和重建未来的生活世界,从而展现人生的理想和人生的意义世界,展现人性的崇高和尊严,并显示高贵的人类区别于动物世界并远远地高出动物世界的原因。     

政治哲学与政治学辨析

从理论上弄清政治哲学和政治学的区别和联系具有十分重要的意义.政治学作为一种社会科学应当对其研究对象采取一种不含有研究者任何主观偏好的客观态度,因此它没有阶级性.然而政治哲学的核心问题则是政治的合理性或合法性问题,因而它对政治问题的研究必然包含价值判断.政治学与政治哲学的区别基于"事实"与"价值"的区分.因此,二者之间存...     

论人的需要及其合理性

源于人的本性的需要具有天然的合理性,但人的需要须通过欲望或利益的形式而实现,因此要把握需要合理性,对真实需要与被欲望扭曲的需要进行区分,并对利益的社会合理性进行考察.人的需要具有结构性、生产性和社会性,实现需要自身结构的合理性,要坚持其基础性、全面性和发展性;实现生产实践的合理性,要解决技术合理性与社会合理性的矛盾;而实现需要的合理性,则要解决需要主体之间利益关系的合理性和消费方式的合理性问题.     

Rational preference: Decision theory as a theory of practical rationality

In general, the technical apparatus of decision theory is well developed. It has loads of theorems, and they can be proved from axioms. Many of the theorems are interesting, and useful both from a philosophical and a practical perspective. But decision theory does not have a well agreed upon interpretation. Its technical terms, in particular, utility and preference do not have a single clear and uncontroversial meaning.How to interpret these terms depends, of course, on what purposes in pursuit of which one wants to put decision theory to use. One might want to use it as a model of economic decision-making, in order to predict the behavior of corporations or of the stock market. In that case, it might be useful to interpret the technical term utility as meaning money profit. Decision theory would then be an empirical theory. I want to look into the question of what utility could mean, if we want decision theory to function as a theory of practical rationality. I want to know whether it makes good sense to think of practical rationality as fully or even partly accounted for by decision theory. I shall lay my cards on the table: I hope it does make good sense to think of it that way. For, I think, if Humeans are right about practical rationality, then decision theory must play a very large part in their account. And I think Humeanism has very strong attractions.     

Practical reason or metapreferences? an undogmatic defense of kantian morality

This article presents the thesis that a critique of decisions is not necessarily (except in the trivial sense) a critique of preferences. This thesis runs contrary to the fundamental assumption in economic theory that a critique of decisions will always simultaneously be a critique of (subjective) preferences, since decision behavior is after all a manifestation of preferences. If this thesis is right, then the paradigm of so-called instrumental rationality is in serious trouble, not for external reasons but because of imminent inconsistencies. The thesis is developed in five parts: I. A preliminary remark to the economic theory of rationality in general. II. The cooperation problem as a challenge to the economic theory of rationality. III. An account of the most interesting attempt to save the theory. IV. A critique of that attempt. V. And the conclusion: practical reason is concerned with actions and not with preferences.     

责任伦理：社会主义核心价值体系构建的合理性基础

核心价值体系作为社会基本价值关系的观念呈现,是人作为社会存在的本质在价值观念的自觉重构,也是当前社会主义市场经济对人的全面发展的新要求。责任伦理作为实践主体的伦理自觉,符合核心价值体系建设的要求,与核心价值体系正相契合。因此,成为核心价值体系构建的合理性基础。