论文部分内容阅读
董仲舒认为义利都是人生而具有的,只是各具不同的功用,似乎还矇眬地意识到,追求利的原动力来自于人自身的需求。遗憾的是董仲舒并没有肯定这种原始的动力,将利看成是社会动乱的主要原因。司马迁在其基础上不仅肯定了人的这一私欲和本性,并且认为利可以促于义的形成和施行。以义制利和义利并趋的不同认识决定了董仲舒与司马迁不同的经济主张。董仲舒认为国家应采取一系列措施对人欲及经济进行积极调控,这就是他著名的调均思想。由于肯定人的逐利行为,并认可商业活动的积极作用,司马迁对经济更多的是持一种放任、引导的观点。不同的人生经历、学术基础、思维角度以及面对的不同的社会背景决定了二人经济思想的差别。二人的经济思想在封建社会都带有一定的理想色彩。
Tung Chung-shu believes that righteousness and profit are both life-giving, but each has its own different functions. It seems that he has also realized with dunks that the impetus for the pursuit of profit comes from the needs of man himself. Regrettably, Dong Zhongshu did not affirm this original motive force and regards profit as the main cause of social unrest. On this basis, Sima Qian not only affirmed the lust and nature of human beings, but also believed that Lee could promote the formation and implementation of righteousness. Different understandings of justice, interest, interest and tendency determine that Dong Zhongshu and Sima Qian have different economic opinions. Dong Zhongshu believes that the state should take a series of measures to actively control people’s appetites and the economy, which is his famous tune-average thought. Because affirming people’s profit-seeking behavior and recognizing the positive role of business activities, Sima Qian holds a more laissez-faire and guiding view on the economy. Different life experience, academic foundation, thinking angle and different social backgrounds determine the difference between the two economic thoughts. The economic thinking of both people in the feudal society with a certain ideal color.