名人演讲精选：张维迎演讲实录
文章摘要：著名经济学家，北京大学光华管理学院副院长、经济学教授，北京大学工商管理研究所所长，同时兼任牛津大学现代中国研究中心研究员，北京大学网络经济研究中心主任——张维迎，他是国内最早提出“并系统论证双轨制价格改革思路”的学者；他的企业理论、产业改革的理论成果在国内外学术界、政府有关部门和企业界有着广泛影响；他的论文被引用率连续几年名列第一。他首次提出“学而优则商”的观点，指出造就企业家队伍的关键是所有制改革。
分类：
经济学和宗教伦理的基本假设是，人是自我中心的。宗教的逻辑和市场的逻辑最大不同是，宗教的逻辑是通过改变人的心来达到善的行为，市场的逻辑不想改变人的心，而是规范人的行(行为)，即以利人之行，实现利己之心!
1. 人是以自我为中心的
市场本身没有改变人的本性，市场从不试图改变人的本性
人类犯错误或干坏事有两种原因，一是无知，知识有限，不明白什么是好，什么是坏，想干好事，结果却成了坏事;二是无耻，明知这事坏，损害别人，为了自己的利益仍然去做。比如，在广泛关注的食品安全问题的整个链条中，好多人做了负面贡献，其中有些人可能出于无知，有些人可能出于无耻。
现实中，这二者很难区分。许多无耻行为从根本上讲也可以说是因为无知，是缺乏智慧的表现，结果常常是聪明反被聪明误。所以，我提醒大家，不要简单地把人类犯的所有错误，都归于无耻，这点非常非常重要。
关于市场经济，学者包括经济学者都要保有这样一种认识：市场本身没有改变人的本性，市场从不试图改变人的本性，拥护市场的人没有想过用市场改变人的本性;反过来，正因人的本性没法改变，所以才有了市场经济，也才需要市场经济，市场使人的行为更符合善的要求。
人的本性是什么?宽泛点说，就是几乎所有人，都是以自我为中心的(self-cen-tered)。我不一定说人是自私的，但是人是以自我为中心的，这一点上，亚里士多德和孔子这样看，亚当·斯密也这样看。
亚当·斯密说同情心普遍存在，即使最坏的人也有同情心，但所有的同情心都是围绕自己展开的，同情心的大小，一是与物理上的距离有关，二是与生理上的距离有关。人因为能设身处地，才会同情他人;因为能将心比心，才有“己所不欲，勿施于人”的可能。看到自己的亲人过世，比看到几千公里外非洲人的过世时的同情心肯定要大;看到猴子被杀，比看到蚂蚁被杀时的同情心也要大。为什么?因为猴子比蚂蚁与人的相似性更大。而你对蚂蚁的同情心，可能比对植物的同情心更大，这也就是为什么一些信奉佛教的人，不吃荤，只吃素，因为动物在形象上、生理上跟人的相似性比起植物来更大。所以同情心是建立在自我中心的基础上的。
并且，即使利他主义也是自我中心的。为认识的人牺牲自己利益的人，比为不认识的人牺牲自己利益的人多;拔己一毛而利天下的人比比皆是，但舍己一命而救他人的寥寥无几。这些，亚当·斯密在《道德情操论》里都讲到了。
我的理解，儒家的一整套伦理体系也是建立在自我中心的基础上。儒家伦理是有等级的，为什么从亲情孝悌扩展到宗族、国家层面?因为人是以自我为中心的。爱国主义也是自我中心的表现，否则你为什么不爱其他国家?
事实上，所有的宗教都假定人是自我中心的，这与经济学的基本假设没什么不同。关于人性的假设，无论科学的宗教的，古代的现代的，中国的外国的，都一样。亚当·斯密如果不假定人以自我为中心，就不会写出《道德情操论》，也不会写出《国富论》。同样，孔子如果不是假定人是自我中心的，就不会有儒家的道德伦理系统。正因为自我中心的这个本性可能带来问题，人类才需要被教导，才产生了宗教。儒家内部有人性恶、人性善的争论，西方启蒙思想家霍布斯和洛克对自然状态下人的行为描述也大相径庭，这些都不重要，重要的是都根本上假定人是以自我为中心的，一切主张都从这个假设展开。
2. 市场的逻辑和强盗的逻辑
如果没有自由竞争，靠政府垄断，只允许一部分人干，这就不是市场的逻辑，是强盗的逻辑。就像国有银行，赚那么多钱，有相当一部分是靠强盗的逻辑
这就带来一个问题：人是自我中心的，但任何人要生存都离不开他人的合作和协助，人类怎样从以自我为中心到达合作和互助?或者说，自利的本性如何能够给他人带来好处，而不是伤害?
每个人都希望生活幸福，都不断追求better life。实现这个目标的手段，归纳一下，大概两种：第一，是通过让别人不幸福而使自己幸福，即用伤害别人的方式为自己得到好处。我称之为“强盗的逻辑”。第二，是通过让别人幸福使自己变得幸福。我称之为“市场的逻辑”。仔细想一下，市场的逻辑其实也是宗教的逻辑，所有宗教都教育人要积德行善，也就是通过利他而实现自己的幸福。比如，老子讲“既以为人己愈有，既以与人己愈多”;佛教主张通过了悟“空性”达到“无我”的境地，以“普度众生”来实现自己的幸福。当然，无我要修炼才能达到，不是天生无我，要是天生无我就没必要修炼了，也就没有宗教了。从这方面讲，宗教的逻辑和市场的逻辑最大不同是，宗教的逻辑是通过改
变人的心来达到善的行为，市场的逻辑不想改变人的心，而是规范人的行(行为)，即以利人之行，实现利己之心!
我上次去山西榆次，看到县古衙门有一幅对联，大概是这样的：
百善孝为先，原心不原迹，原迹贫门无孝子
万恶淫为首，论迹不论心，论心世上无完人
什么意思呢?善以心论，恶以行断。一个人是否是孝子，不能看这人给了父母多少钱、盖什么房子、买什么车，如果这样，穷孩子就没办法当孝子了。但判断一个人是不是恶人，不能看有没有恶的心，而要看有没有恶的行。道德伦理规范的是行为，而不是心!这就是宗教和市场逻辑的基本差别。市场不求改变人的心，只求改变人的行为，市场就是你必须通过满足别人的需要来实现你自利的动机。从这个角度讲，市场本身是最讲伦理的，它使得你不能伤害别人，你致富也好，地位提升也罢，一定得建立在给他人创造幸福、为社会创造财富的基础上。这是我理解的市场的逻辑。
认为市场的逻辑和伦理宗教对立，完全不对。与市场的逻辑真正对立的是强盗的逻辑。强盗的逻辑随处可见。值得注意的是，有些强盗行为的出发点可能非常善，当初搞计划经济就是这样。当然，在现实的市场经济中，这两种逻辑是共存的，有些人赚了钱不是因为给别人带来了幸福，而是因为给别人带来不幸，但这本身不是市场的逻辑。从长远看，在市场中一个人能持久致富，一定是靠诚实守信，而不是靠坑蒙拐骗，如司马迁所言，“廉吏久，久更富，廉贾归富。”我认为市场制度是最符合伦理道德的，但是，正如我们对好多问题都有理解上的偏差，我们对市场也存有误解。
对市场的偏见可能与感情色彩有关。简单地说，市场给每个人发财致富的机会，只要你为别人创造价值。健康的市场中谁赚钱最多?就是提供服务人数最多的人。一个保姆，只能服务一个人或一家人，挣不了多少钱，但是生产iPad或iPhone，就可以服务几千万人，几亿人，赚的钱就多得多。市场就是按照你给多少人带来幸福回报你。给别人带来的幸福越多，赚得钱就越多;带给别人的幸福越少，赚得钱就越少，这就是市场的逻辑。
有时，同样情况别人赚钱了，你没赚钱，你会不满，这跟人性的一个特点有关：我们往往把成功归于自己的聪明才智，而失败了总怨恨别人;我们常把自己看得比本来高尚，把别人看得比本来卑鄙。赚不到大钱的人，往往有这样一种心理：不是我没本事，而是我道德水平太高，不愿骗人。那些人为什么能赚大钱?心黑。这是自我安慰。现实生活中，批评别人道德水平差的人，相当一部分道德水平最差。要求别人大公无私的人，可能最贪婪，他们喜欢占领道德制高点，忽悠别人以谋取私利。他说别人太贪，往往是嫌对方要价过高，希望能以更便宜的价格买入;而从对方的角度看，也觉得另一方想占便宜，花这么点钱就想买我这么值钱的东西。如果仅仅从伦理、道德的角度，可能会做出和事实相悖的评价。
关于市场和伦理的关系，从古到今还是有好多误解，有必要澄清。大家都同意，通过给别人带来幸福从而使自己变得幸福，最符合伦理。但我的观点是，仅仅靠说服人，没用，还得靠制度。这个制度就是自由市场，就是自由竞争!如果没有自由竞争，靠政府垄断，只允许一部分人干，这就不是市场的逻辑，是强盗的逻辑。就像国有银行，赚那么多钱，有相当一部分是靠强盗的逻辑。你存款时它只付百分之一二的利息，而它贷款时收取百分之五六的利息，这么大的利差，傻瓜都能赚钱。银行的高利润，有一部分靠的是剥削储户，而不是创造价值。这不是市场，这是反市场，政府对市场的干预太强了。
微观层面上，每个人做事都是有目的的，每个人都有一双看得见的手去实现自己的目的，宏观层面上，市场是双看不见的手，这双看不见的手监督看得见的手一定不能偷偷干坏事。看不见的手一定是帮助别人的手，而不是伤害别人的手。如果在宏观层面还有其他看得见的手，这时候市场就可能无能为力，你的看得见的手就会伤害别人，而不是给别人带来幸福。
3. 道德只能在市场中实现
市场经济还有一个特点，就是竞争中只有着眼于长远利益的人，才能够真正赚钱，所以市场经济里的人特别注重自己的名声
前文的意思不是否定宗教的、伦理的追求，它们和市场本身是一样的，使人有善的行为，只是宗教和伦理是从人心的角度去考虑问题，市场是从行为上考虑问题，“原迹不原心”。
亚当·斯密原话的意思是，在竞争的市场上，一个人追求自身利益并不是什么坏事，并不是恶的行为，相反，他这样做的时候给社会带来的好处比他直接去追求社会利益时还要大，还要好。这就是亚当·斯密的伟大之处，他看到常人看不到的，现实中也确确实实如此。再看看计划经济的后果，很难说它初始的目的有多不好，但带来的却是灾难，但那些卖瓜子的人，出发点不过是自己赚钱，但必须做出别人喜欢吃的瓜子才能赚到钱。
其实亚当·斯密的基本思想两千多年前司马迁就提出了。司马迁可能是世界上最早的坚定的自由放任市场主义者，他说得很清楚，人们追求快乐幸福你是没有办法改变的，你说服也没用。“故善者因之，其次利导之，其次教诲之，其次整齐之，最下者与之争”，就是要顺其自然，不需要政府搞出那么多的规划，那么多的产业政策，征集动员大家干这干那。所以我认为司马迁是人类历史上第一个自由市场的坚定的主张者、捍卫者。
早司马迁几百年的老子是人类历史上第一个自由主义者。老子承认人们追求幸福的正当性，他对政府干预政策对人类幸福的危害有深刻的认知，但他没有理解市场的奥妙，所以他教导人们，追求幸福的办法是节制欲望，清心寡欲。与老子不同，司马迁深刻认识到，节制欲望不是追求幸福的最好办法，市场经济可以将人的利己之心变成利人之行，农工商虞，分工合作，“各劝其业，乐其事”，“各任其能，竭其力”，财富就像水从高处往低处流一样，不召自来，不求自出，“上则富国，下则富家”，是最自然而然的事情。他并且认识到，财富是道德的基础，所谓“仓廪实而知礼节，衣食足而知荣辱”，“礼生于有而废于无”。
市场经济还有一个特点，就是竞争中只有着眼于长远利益的人，才能够真正赚钱，所以市场经济里的人特别注重自己的名声。一瓶矿泉水，它是谁生产的我们不知道， 这个矿泉水公司的老板我们不认识， 我们为什么能够放心喝它?就是因为利润制度的作用， 你的利己之心， 一定要变成利人之行。伦理、 宗教、 哲学， 我觉得和市场没有任何矛盾， 只是考虑问题角度不一样。好多科学的不同， 不是研究对象的不同， 而是研究方法的不同， 趋于这个目的的方法不一样。因为人是无知的， 教育就非常重要，就是让人们更懂得自己的长远利益所在，不要为短期利益牺牲长远利益。
有一点要强调，利他主义并不能解决人与人之间的冲突。比方说，一样东西我说两块卖给你，你说不行，得五块才买，我说五毛就行了，你说不行，得二十块，这个交易绝对成交不了，因为都太为对方考虑了。市场是建立在以自我为中心的基础之上的，所以才能讨价还价，才有利益均衡，如果都是慷慨君子，交易价格反倒没办法确定了。
市场经济需要道德基础，但这一道德只能在市场中实现和找到，也可以反过来说，道德需要建立在市场的基础上。因为善的动机既可能做好事，也可能做坏事。我们需要一个制度，使你要满足自己的利益，必须首先满足别人的利益;第二还要教育人，教育不是给人灌输什么，而是让人明白事理，不犯傻。就像我经常给企业界讲的，什么是企业?一个企业真正的竞争力是什么?是你的声誉，是名声。我们天生就看得比较近，要让一个人看得远一点，需要有好的制度，还需要好的理论研究。这么讲是有依据的。世界范围看，哪个地方市场经济比较发达，比较健全，哪个地方人的道德水平就比较高，更诚实守信。不诚实守信你企业是存在不下去的，很快就会完蛋。相反，哪个地区的市场经济不发达，受到政府的干预多，哪个地方坑蒙拐骗就多。
当然我不否认修心很重要，但修心本身也是自我利益的需要，因为一个人的幸福很大程度上依赖于别人对自己的认可。我们希望自己比别人好，希望受人尊重，所以必须有个好名声，这些本身也是自我中心为基础的需要。人的道德、善心，还是基于自我为中心建立起来的。套用亚当·斯密的话，劝道人们行善的最有效方法是告诉他，这样做是他自己的利益所在，而不是别人的需要。如果一个人不关心自己，你瞪我一眼有什么关系，我不在乎自己，你打我一顿我也不在乎，又何必关心他人呢?
4. 中国教育的最大失败：说假话不脸红
如果社会不注意制度建设，不尊重人权、财产制度，仅仅靠说教，最后恰恰是人人都变得虚伪。
由于否定了市场的逻辑，才使得社会变得如此虚伪，如此假话连篇
人类面临的一个基本问题，是每个人都自我中心，但又需要别人的合作，怎么能够这两方面统一起来，这是所有的哲学、道德学、市场理论都希望解决的。我深信，市场经济本身是解决这个矛盾和挑战的最有效的方式。
前面讲到，支配人类历史的就两大逻辑，一是强盗的逻辑，一是市场的逻辑。国家之间打仗是强盗的逻辑，自由贸易、交换是市场的逻辑。我相信这两个逻辑未来仍然会并存。我们希望处理国际关系也能用市场的逻辑，比如一个国家和民族的崛起，是靠自由贸易，而不是靠征服、靠武力解决问题。好在人类都有学习的能力，中国有句古语，“不打不成交”，开始可能喜欢用打的方式，用侵害别人的方式，最后两败俱伤，之后认识到自己的错误，就开始“交”往。“交”就是交换、互利、和平。第二次世界大战时，日本、德国企图用强盗的逻辑富强，没成功，二战后日本和德国靠生产汽车、电子等产品发展起来，依靠的是市场的逻辑。人类的进步就是不断走向市场的逻辑。我们跟美国人坐下来谈判，说这对美国好，美国人也说这对中国好，这就是人类的聪明之处。
如果社会不注意制度建设，不尊重人权、财产制度，仅仅靠说教，最后恰恰是人人都变得虚伪。由于否定了市场的逻辑，才使得社会变得如此虚伪，如此假话连篇
过去研究伦理学和研究市场的学者之间误解太多，其实人类的分歧好多都是由误解而来，是无知导致的。在化解分歧和误解上，伦理学者和经济学者应该像亲兄弟，因为要达到的目的是一样的。伦理道德和市场的研究在未来应该完全成为统一体。事实上，西方中世纪的时候，经济学不过是伦理学的一部分。我是搞经济学的，从来不否认道德伦理的重要性。制度是大框架，同时也要道德伦理。
中国教育的最大失败是在哪里?不是抑制了青年人的创造性，消灭了他们的好奇心。失败是使人变得虚伪，说假话不再脸红!为什么?就是因为没建立一个好的私有产权制度。西方没有一个企业贴标语说要诚实守信，不用贴，这是自然而然的，这就是市场。丢掉了市场的逻辑，丢掉了基本的市场规则，只能用虚无缥渺的说教，最后就是言行不一。
以前上学时，一个同学铅笔刀丢了，老师让学生排成一队，看谁脸红，脸红的人就是偷铅笔刀的人。现在再把人叫一块儿，不再脸红了，这方法没用。由于否定了市场的逻辑，才使得社会变得如此虚伪，如此假话连篇，这是让我最痛心的。强调伦理时不要忘记这一点，否则我们对这个社会的建设贡献不大。
除了无知和无耻，社科院钱津教授讲的“无奈”，非常有启发性，也有活生生的例子，如央视经常播些节目，他们自己也不喜欢，很无奈。但我想，无奈是因为意志或能力软弱，通常是由无知或者无耻派生出来的。
5. 普适价值是必须的，也是可能的
如果不承认普适价值，等于中国文化永远不能走向世界，中国永远不能崛起
价值是我们普遍认可的行为准则，目的是解决我们的冲突和约束我们的行为。比如开车要靠右行，有这样一个规则，冲突就大大减少。不同的国家，不同的地区，自然有不同的价值观念和行为规则。全球化出现后，一些地方的价值观、规则还会保留，但一些基本规则就得统一了。在中国开车靠右行，在英国靠左行，如果英国人和中国人在同一条马路，就要统一规则。欧洲各国原来的交通规则也是不一样的，拿破仑以来的欧洲一体化导致了欧洲交通规则的统一。瑞典在1967年之前是靠左行，后来改成了靠右行。
反对普适价值可能对人类本身不是件好事，如果没有普适价值，人类怎么可能相互交往呢?比如，不同国家之间要按照市场的规则交 换产品，就得尊重每个人的权利。私有财产制度就应是普遍认可的规则，我不能抢你的东西，我也不能强迫你买我的东西，只有通过谈判，才知道什么是公平价格。 有个共同的规则，从平衡利益的角度看是非常有必要的。不承认普适价值，等于说开车不需要统一的交通规则，结果可能是冲突甚至更为悲惨。当然，普适价值并不 是简单地把某一方的规则强加给另一方，规则的形成可能是相互妥协的结果。
再举一例。如果各国都坚持说自己国家的语言，大家就没法交流。一百多年前有人创造了世界语，但没流行起来，语言是数千万年历史积累起来的，人为创造一种语言可能像计划经济一样不可行。我的意思是，交流首先要有一种共同的语言，其次才是使用哪种语言。具体使用哪种语言可能与历史有关。英语成为世界商界和学术界的通用语言，有诸多历史原因，其中一个就是美国成为世界大国。现在学中文的外国人越来越多，是因为中国崛起。中国人的一些价值观念也可能变成普适价值，儒家、道家等传统哲学越来越受到全世界的重视就是证明。如果不承认普适价值，等于中国文化永远不能走向世界，中国永远不能崛起!
普适价值也是可能的。人类本来就是同宗同族，一万多年前的冰盖融化把各大洲分开，人类现在的不同文化是在一万年以内形成的。人类来自共同的祖先，基因上不应该有文化冲突。
其次，人类好多利益冲突被我们大大夸大了，这些夸大有的是出于无知，有的是因为无耻。有思想者把人类的冲突都归结于不可协调的阶级矛盾，最后将一切都归为斗斗斗。我们应该认识到，工人阶级和资本家之间的利益冲突，比想象的少，好多利益冲突是发生在工人内部，而不是工人阶级与资本家阶级之间。现在反对中国出口的美国人主要是美国的工人阶级，而不是美国的资本家，帮助中国游说美国政府的反倒是美国的企业家，而不是美国的工人，就是因为中国工人阶级和美国工人阶级的冲突大于中国工人阶级和美国资本家之间的冲突，尽管前一个冲突也由于我们的无知被夸大了。中国和美国的冲突，中国和东南亚、日本的冲突，真的远比我们想象的要小。无知的教育灌输的理念导致我们夸大了冲突。现在，完全有可能通过更多沟通，尤其是中国的崛起使得普适价值的形成应该更加容易。过分强调中国的独特性对中国的利益或者说中国人民的利益是不好的。这是我的基本判断。
如果大家都按照市场的逻辑去做，都想办法通过为别人创造价值，为别的国家、民族带来财富而获得自己的幸福，那么这个世界的冲突就会变少，自由贸易非常非常重要。我在美国演讲时推荐美国政治家读两本书，一是亚当·斯密的《国富论》，就是自由贸易的理论;二是老子的《道德经》。老子讲“大邦者下流”，说的是真正做一个世界的领导者，不能太趾高气昂，不能太跋扈，要有胸怀和气量。要领导不同文化的人民，尤其如此!伊斯兰文化虽然与我们不一样，但人的本性一样，他们也热爱和平，问题是我们需要真正理解他们。
普适价值，第一是必须的，第二是可能的。如果不承认这一点，就只能走向强盗的逻辑，世界没有宁日，只有末日。
Celebrity lecture Featured: Zhang Weiying record of the speech
Abstract: the famous economist, Professor of economics at the Guanghua School of Management, vice president of Beijing University, Beijing University Institute of business administration, is also modern China Research Center at the University of Oxford, Beijing University, director of research center of network economy -- Zhang Weiying, he is home puts forward the earliest" and system demonstration double-track price system reform train of thought" the scholar; his theory of enterprise, industry reform the theoretical results in academic circles at home and abroad, relevant departments of the government and the business community has a broad impact; his papers are cited rate for several consecutive years ranked first. He presented the first " learn and actor criterion business" viewpoint, that brings up entrepreneur team is the key to the reform of ownership.
Classification:
Economics and religious ethics is the fundamental assumption, who is self-centered. Religious logic and the logic of the market the biggest difference is, religious logic is by changing the human heart to achieve good behavior, the logic of the market do not want to change people's heart, but the standard of lines ( behavior ), i.e. to trip, realize hoggish heart!
1 people are self centered
The market itself does not change the nature of man, the market never tried to change human nature
Human error or do bad things for two reasons, one is ignorant, limited knowledge, do not understand what is good, what is bad, want to do good, but it has become a bad thing; the two is shameless, knowing that this bad, harm to others, for their own interests still to do. For example, in the wide attention of the food safety issues in the chain, many people make a negative contribution, which some people may be out of ignorance, some people may be shameless.
In reality, it is difficult to distinguish between the two. Many outrageous behavior fundamentally can also be said to be because of ignorance, is the lack of intellectual performance, the results were often cleverness may overreach itself. So, I remind you, don't simply take human any mistake, are attributed to the shameless, this is very important.
On market economy, scholars including economic scholars to have such an understanding: the market itself does not change the nature of man, the market never tried to change human nature, support market had no thought of using market change human nature; in turn, is human nature cannot change, so there are market economy, also is need of market economy, the market makes people act more in line with the requirements of good.
Human nature is what? Broadly, is almost all of them, are self-centered ( self-cen-tered ). I am not certain that people are selfish, but who is self-centered, on this point, Aristotle and Kong Zi, Adam Smith also look like this.
Adam Smith said compassion prevails, even the bad people are compassionate, but all the compassion is around you, heart size, one is associated with physical distance, two was associated with physical distance relation. Because people can place oneself in others' position, will sympathize with others; because I can feel for others, is "do not do to you," in the may. To see their loved ones died, than to see thousands of kilometers of Africans died when compassion must be large; see the monkeys were killed, than to see the ants were killed when compassion will. Why? Because monkeys than ants with similarity greater. But you to the ant compassion, sympathy more than on the plants, which is why some Buddhist people, don't eat meat, eat only vegetarian food, because the animals in the image, physical and human similarities to greater than plants. So compassion is based on self center based on.
And, even though altruism and self center. As the awareness of the human sacrifice, than to not know who sacrifice people pull one hair; and benefit the people in the world meet the eye everywhere, but my life to save others scanty. Of these, Adam Smith's the theory of moral sentiments" in" all about.
I understand, Confucian ethics of one a complete set of system is based on the self center based on. Confucian ethics is a grade, why from family filial piety is extended to the clan, the national level? Because people are self-centered. Patriotism is the self-centred, or why you don't love others?
In fact, all religions suppose that man is self centered, and this is no different from the basic hypothesis of economics. On the humanity hypothesis, both science and religion in ancient, modern, Chinese and foreign, are the same. Adam Smith, if do not assume a self-centered person, would write" the theory of moral sentiments", also does not write" wealth of nations". Similarly, Kong Zi if not suppose that man is self centered, there would be no Confucian ethics system. Because of the self center this nature may cause problems, human beings need to be taught, it produced religions. The interior has evil human nature, human nature is good arguments, the Western Enlightenment thinkers Hobbes and Rock on the natural human behavior description can be quite different, these are not important, important is fundamentally posits that people are self-centered, all propositions are from this assumption.
2 market logic and the logic of bandits
If there is no free competition, rely on a government monopoly, only allow one part person, it is not the logic of the market, is the logic of bandits. As a state-owned bank, make so much money, have quite one part is to rely on logic of bandits
This brings a problem: one is self centered, but no one should live without the cooperation of others and help, how human beings from self-centered to cooperation and mutual assistance? Perhaps say, from nature to yield benefits to others, not to hurt?
Everyone wants to live a happy life, constant pursuit of better life. To achieve this goal means, to summarize, probably in two ways: first, by let others not happy and make you happy, that is used to hurt others for their own benefit. I called "the logic of bandits". Second, by making others happy is to make yourself happy. I called it" the logic of the market". Think carefully, the logic of the market is also a religious logic, all religions are educated people to do, namely through the altruistic and realize their own happiness. For example, Lao Zi" is thought to have more, both in and people are more"; Buddhism advocated by the" empty" to "no I " condition, in order to" deliver all living creatures from torment" to achieve their own happiness. Of course, I must practice to achieve, not born without me, if born I needn't discipline, there would be no religion. In this regard, religious logic and the logic of the market the biggest difference is, religious logic is modified by
Human heart to achieve good behavior, the logic of the market do not want to change people's heart, but the standard of lines ( behavior ), i.e. to trip, realize hoggish heart!
The last time I went to Shanxi, Yuci, see the ancient county yamen is a couplet, is like this:
Filial piety, the original heart is not the original trace, the trace of poverty door no filial
Lewdness is the worst of all, by mark whether heart heart, on the world is perfect
What do you mean? Good to heart of evil, to line fault. Whether a person is a person, cannot see this man gave them money, what a house, what car to buy, if so, the poor child can't be a filial child. But is it right? The wicked judge a person, cannot see no evil heart, and have done evil. Ethical behavior, and not the heart! This is the basic difference between religion and the logic of the market. The market does not seek to change people's hearts, only to change people's behavior, market is that you must pass to meeting the needs of others to achieve your selfish motives. From this perspective, the market itself is the most ethical, it makes you can not hurt others, you rich or not, to upgrade the status of it, must be built on to others to create happiness, create wealth for the society on the basis of. This is my understanding of the logic of the market.
Think the market logic and ethics religious opposition, completely wrong. With the logic of the market really in opposition is the logic of bandits. Logic of bandits everywhere. Notably, some of the behavior of the starting point may be very good, the original planned economy is such. Of course, in the reality of the market economy, these two kinds of logic is the coexistence of, some people earn money not because others bring happiness to others, but because of misfortune, but this is not the logic of the market. From long-term look, in the market one can lasting to become rich, must rely on the honesty and trustworthiness, and not on the bluff and deceive, as Sima Qian said," Li long, long to the rich richer, low-cost jia." I think the market system is the most ethical, but on many issues, as we have to understand the deviation of market, we also have misunderstandings.
On market bias may be associated with feelings of color. Simply put, the market for everyone to get rich opportunity, as long as you create value for others. A healthy market who make the most money? Is the largest number of people to provide services. A nanny, can only serve one or one family, earn a little money, but the production of iPad or iPhone, you can service tens of millions of people, hundreds of millions of people, money is much more. The market is according to how much happiness in return for you. To bring others happiness more, earn more money; bring the happiness of others less money, earn less, this is the logic of the market.
Sometimes, the same situation others make money, you have money, you will be dissatisfied with the human, this one features: we tend to attribute his success to his one's ability and cleverness, and failed total hate someone else; we often think of himself than he originally noble, other than originally mean. Not to earn money to people, often have such a psychological : no I don't have the skills, but my moral level is too high, not lie. Why those people can make money? Heart black. This is the consolation. In real life, criticize morality level difference person, a considerable part of the worst moral level. Ask others selfless person, perhaps the most greedy, they like claiming the moral high ground, others for personal gain. He said that people are too greedy, is often too each other the asking price is too high, hoping to buy cheaper price; but from the other point of view, think the other wants to take advantage of, spend so little money to buy me something valuable. If only from the ethical, moral, and may make factual evaluation.
On the market and ethical relations, since ancient times there are still a lot of misunderstanding, there is a need to clarify. All agree, through bring happiness to others to be happy, the most ethical. But my opinion is that, only by persuasion, useless, still must rely on system. This system is a free market, competition is free! If no free competition, rely on a government monopoly, only allow one part person, it is not the logic of the market, is the logic of bandits. As a state-owned bank, make so much money, have quite one part is to rely on logic of bandits. Your deposit when it paid only one or two per cent of interest, while its loans for five or six per cent of interest, so big spreads, fool can make money. Bank profits high, has a portion on the exploitation of the depositor, and not to create value. This is not the market, the market, the government intervention into the market brilliant.
On the micro level, each people have a purpose, everyone has a pair of visible hand to achieve their goals, the macro level, the market is the invisible hand, the invisible hand and visible hand must not secretly doing bad things. The invisible hand is to help others, not to harm others hand. If at the macro level and other visible hand, then the market may be incapable of action, you see the hand will hurt others, not to bring happiness to others.
3 moral only true in the market
Market economy has a characteristic, is the competition only focus on long-term interests of people, it can really make money in the market economy, so people pay special attention to your reputation
We do not deny the religious, ethical pursuit, they and the market itself is the same, so that people have good behavior, but religion and ethics from people 's point of view to consider, the market is from behavior to consider an issue," the original trace is not the original heart".
Adam Smith's words mean, in a competitive market, a person to pursue their own interests and not bad, not bad behavior, on the contrary, he did give the social benefits than he went directly to the pursuit of social benefits when the larger, more good. This is Adam Smith 's greatness, he saw that ordinary people can not see, really so in reality. Have a look again planned economic consequences, it is difficult to say the initial purpose is not good, but it is brought about by the disaster, but those who sell melon seeds, the starting point however is to make money, but must make people love to eat melon seeds can earn money.
In fact, Adam Smith's basic idea two thousand years ago, Sima Qian has put forward the. Sima Qian is probably the world's first strong laissez-faire market anarchist, he said very clearly, people pursuit happiness you can not be changed, you convince also useless. " So good because of it, secondly leading, followed by education, followed by the regular, most Xiazhe and struggle", is to let nature take its course, without the need for the government to make so much planning, so many of the industry policy, collect mobilized to do this and that. So I think that Sima Qian is in the human history the first free market determined advocates, defenders.
Early Sima Qian several hundred years of Laozi is the history of mankind's first liberal. I admit that people pursuit happiness legitimacy, he intervenes to the government policies on human happiness hazards have profound understanding, but he did not understand the market again, so he taught the people, the pursuit of happiness is to control desire, ascetic. And I, Sima Qian realises deeply, controlling desire is not the best way to pursue happiness, market economy will become the heart of self-interest and trip, farming division," Yu, each advised its industry, happy thing"," all the energy, exhaust its power", wealth is like water from a height flows downstream, unbidden, do not seek out", is rich, is rich", is the most come very naturally. He also realized that, wealth is the foundation of morality, the so-called" granary is solid and knowledge courtesy, adequate food and clothing honor knowledge"," masters of ceremonies in and waste in".
Market economy has a characteristic, is the competition only focus on long-term interests of people, it can really make money in the market economy, so people pay special attention to your reputation. A bottle of mineral water, it is those who produce we don't know, the mineral water company boss, we do not know, why we can drink it? Because the profit system, your heart of self-interest, must become one trip. Ethics, religion, philosophy, and I think the market without any contradiction, just consider the problem of different point of view. A lot of science is different, different subjects, but different researching methods, this method is not the same to. Because people are ignorant, education is very important, is to let people know their own long-term interests, not for short-term interests at the expense of long-term interests.
It should be emphasized, altruism and can not solve the conflict between man and man. For example, one thing I said that two sold to you, you say no, five blocks before buying, I said five hair on the line, you said no, twenty block, the transaction is not closing, as are considered for each other. The market is built in self-centered basis, so the ability for a supply of sth., favor
(责任编辑：admin)
