儒家是否真的反消費？

以作者查詢圖書館館藏

、以作者查詢臺灣博碩士

、以作者查詢全國書目

、勘誤回報

、線上人數：54

、訪客IP：3.15.17.25

姓名

彭小萍(Hsiao-ping Peng) 查詢紙本館藏

畢業系所

產業經濟研究所

論文名稱

儒家是否真的反消費？
(Is Confucianism Anti-consumption?)

相關論文

★ 從電子商務演進-探討銀行電子金融服務創新	★ 財富管理業務之探討─以花旗銀行及合作金庫商業銀行為例
★ 數位相機產業市場結構、行為與績效之研究	★ 企業危機處理策略之探討─以台灣非酒精飲料業為例
★ 台灣航空市場產業分析與營運績效研究	★ LED照明產業市場分析
★ 以軟硬整合思維重新探討智慧型手機商業模式	★ 由社會開放的角度看巨量資料興起-兼論垂直分
★ 印刷電路板產業市場分析與營運績效之研究	★ 台灣地區機車製造業產業分析及營運績效之研究
★ 企業之開放式創新行為探討-以光寶科技為例	★ 全球太陽能產業分析-以德國發展為例
★ 國際貨櫃物流港區政策之研究：以鹿特丹港口計畫為核心	★ 美妝產業之開放式創新─以L’Oréal與P&G公司為例
★ 快速時尚管理-找出台灣的下一個ZARA	★ 桃園縣新成屋市場產業分析

檔案

[Endnote RIS 格式]

[Bibtex 格式]

[相關文章]

[文章引用]

[完整記錄]

[館藏目錄]

[檢視]

[下載]

本電子論文使用權限為同意立即開放。
已達開放權限電子全文僅授權使用者為學術研究之目的，進行個人非營利性質之檢索、閱讀、列印。
請遵守中華民國著作權法之相關規定，切勿任意重製、散佈、改作、轉貼、播送，以免觸法。

摘要(中)

明朝陸輯(1515-1552)提出〈禁奢辨〉，主張奢侈的習俗可提供廣大人民生計，故反對政府禁奢。一般人認為中國以儒家為主的主流思想崇儉黜奢，所以〈禁奢辨〉可說是一個與一般印象有別的主張。〈禁奢辨〉已為近年來的一些文獻所注意到，不過目前的文獻似乎認為：與陸輯類似主張的學者都屬「小儒」。總的來說，本文的主要目的乃是想進一步探討：〈禁奢辨〉是否只是一個沒有意義的奇談怪論？因為一個主張如果沒有影響力，則縱使存在過，也沒有意義。但是，直接確認〈禁奢辨〉對思想界或對實際政策是否有影響力，有所困難；這是因為在陸輯之前與之後，雖然有不少思想家或政策執行者有類似的主張（例如，成書於漢朝的《管子》、北宋的范仲淹與清朝的魏源），但是他們幾乎都沒有直接引用他人的說法。所以，本文在探討〈禁奢辨〉對思想界或對實際政策是否有影響力的策略乃是深入分析〈禁奢辨〉，找出陸輯用來支持其主張的基礎有那一些（換言之，我們要分析〈禁奢辨〉到底是由那些更基本的部分構成的）。在找出這些基礎後，我們將進行兩個工作：其一，先比較這些基礎是否是有相似主張的思想家與政策執行者所共享的。其二，這些基礎是否也為中國以儒家為主的主流思想所認可，甚至強調。
本文的另一個研究策略乃是分析以及整理包括儒家在內的中國主流思想關於節儉與奢侈的看法，將之作一個完整的呈現。有了這個完整的面貌，我們自然可以為〈禁奢辨〉定位，釐清它是否真的是一個異類。在分析以及整理儒家關於節儉與奢侈的看法，本文不想作流水帳式的整理，而將從基本哲學的層次去整理。這是因為我們認為儒家學說，尤其宋明理學所強調的新儒家，有高度的一致性，所以，從儒家的核心觀念，可以簡潔而且正確的掌握儒家思想。
換言之，本文可以幫忙釐清一個重要問題：儒家是否真的有反消費傾向？
西方也有一支著名的奢侈論：Bernard Mandeville（1670-1733）於1714年發表〈蜜蜂寓言〉，本文也理所當然的必須把陸輯的〈禁奢辨〉與之比較。目前文獻已經注意到：這兩個中西雙方的奢侈論，有相同之處，例如：奢侈雖不利於個人，但是卻可以使整個社會更好，也就是所謂的「私人的罪惡，公共的利益」。本文的特色乃是從更深一層的角度比較兩者，亦即，將我們找出〈禁奢辨〉的重要基礎進行比較。
其次，為了比較〈禁奢辨〉與〈蜜蜂寓言〉，本文也將分析、整理傳統西方思想中關於節儉與奢侈的著名看法，包括Adam Smith等古典學派的政治經濟學對於消費對國家財富的影響與定位的看法。
本文的主要目的在探討中西方對於節儉與奢侈的思想，為了正確理解、評價這些思想，我們也將整理現代經濟理論（包括數理經濟）對於節儉與奢侈的看法，尤其關於消費是否有助於經濟發展的看法。

摘要(英)

The famous writing of the Judgment of Extravagance by Lu Chi (1515-1552), which had pointed out the extravagance of the rich, could create employment for the poor explicitly. Hence Lu Chi deprecated sumptuary regulations and assured extravagance to enrich people. However, on matters pertaining to consumption and standards of living, it is supposed that traditional Chinese thought has been in favor of saving and frugality and against spending and lavishness. We could find the concept in Judgment of Extravagance is tremendously different from general impression that frugality is a good virtue.
However, the existing literatures label such meritocracy, for instance, the Kuan-tzu, Fan Chung-yen and Wei Yuan, who advocate of extravagance as less important philosopher. We are interested in finding out whether the concept of Judgment of Extravagance is really heresy heterodoxy. If it is not influential, it is meaningless even once existed. Nevertheless, it is difficult to evaluate if it is influential from empirical policy directly. We turn to explore the basic logic in the derivation of the advocate of extravagance. And then we proceed in finding out if the basic logic is shared by the other meritocracy and policy makers. Moreover, we will tell if the basic logic is approved even emphasized in the mainstream concept of Confucianism in ancient China.
We also provide a full version of the general attitude in the thrifty and extravagance in order to judge if the Judgment of Extravagance is really heresy heterodoxy. We will analyze and sum up the typical philosophy from Neo-Confucianism viewpoint. For it is highly consistent with the main concept of Confucianism. In other words, it helps us to tell if Confucianism is anti-consumption.
The Fable of Bees by Bernard Mandeville (1670-1733) in 1714 is also well-known in the West. It is noticed in literatures that the common idea existed in both the Fable of Bees and the Judgment of Extravagance, that prodigality is a vice that is prejudicial to the man, but not to the trade. That is private vice leads to public benefit. We will further compare the deep-rooted philosophy between the Fable of Bees and the Judgment of Extravagance. Hence we will endeavor to explore the economic philosophy and method of classicalists in the theme of consumption to the wealth of nation from the Physiocrats to Adam Smith by surveying the representative masterpieces (e.g., An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations) among these economists.
Furthermore, For the sake of analysis on the advocate of extravagance in general form, we provide the relevant economic theory (includes mathematical economy) to capture the complete philosophy in consumption.

關鍵字(中)

★ 儒家
★ 消費
★ 奢侈
★ 一般均衡分析
★ 財政政策

關鍵字(英)

★ Confucianism
★ consumption
★ extravagance
★ general equilibrium analysis
★ fiscal policy

論文目次

中文摘要………………………………………………………………………………i
Abstract………………………………………………………………………………iii
誌謝…………………………………………………………………………………v
Content……………………………………………………………………………… vi
Preface………………………………………………………………………………vii
Chinese Summary……………………………………………………………………ix
Chapter 1 Introduction……………………………………………………………1
Chapter 2 The Economic Theory and Philosophy in Extravagance………………8
2.1 An Overview of the Economic Theory on Consumption and Saving…………8
2.1.1 The Rationality on Consumption…………………………………………8
2.1.2 The Forward-Looking Theories of Consumer Behavior …………………9
2.1.3 The Paradox of Thrift……………………………………………………10
2.1.4 The Endogenous Growth Theory………………………………………11
2.1.5 The Trap of Poverty……………………………………………………11
2.1.6 The Social Significance of Consumption………………………………13
2.2 The Economy Philosophy in Extravagance……17
2.2.1 Bernard Mandeville and His Precursors ………………………………17
2.2.2 The Physiocrats …………………………………………………………25
2.2.3 An Inquiry into Adam Smith’s Belief on Consumption…………………28
I. Self-interest promotes division of labor, and stimulates the supply of necessaries and convenience, and then creates net product of a nation………………………………………………………………29
II. Productive and Unproductive Labor………………………………34
III. Two Patterns of Economic Development…………………………38
IV. The Consumption Theory Regarding the Nobility…………………41
2.2.4 The Extravagance Philosophy after Adam Smith………………………46
Chapter 3 A General Equilibrium Model of Ancient Chinese Meritocracy Doctrine and its Applications to Extravagance and Fiscal Policy………………51
3.1 The Definition and Assumption of the General Equilibrium Model…………53
3.1.1 The Evolution from Partial Equilibrium Model to General Equilibrium Model…………………………………………………………………53
3.1.2 The Comparison between the Partial and General Equilibrium Models……54
3.1.3 The Essence of a General Equilibrium Analysis………………………56
3.2 The General Equilibrium Analysis in Extravagance…………………………58
3.2.1 The Definition of the General Equilibrium Model in Ancient Chinese Meritocracy Doctrine -- The Inverse Say’s Law…………………………58
3.2.2 Kuan Chung Advocated Heavy Consumption and Rich Burial…………61
3.2.3 Lu Chi Observed Extravagant Custom Makes People Easy to Earn a Living……………………………………………………………………62
3.2.4 Fan Chung-yen Asserted Amusement and Construction Instead of Work Relief……………………………………………………………………65
3.2.5 People Learned the Judgment of Extravagance from Experience………66
3.3 The Debate on the Fiscal Policy Illusion……………………………………69
Chapter 4 The Political Economy Thought on the Advocate of Extravagance in Ancient China…………………………………………………………71
4.1 Prevent the Inequality of Income Distribution is the Main Political Philosophy in Ancient China……………………………………………………………71
4.2 The Comparison between the Judgment of Extravagance and the Fable of Bees…………………………………………………………………………72
4.3 The Comparison between the Europe and Ancient China in Extravagance……73
Chapter 5 An Overall Review on the Consumption of Wealth in Ancient China………………………………………………………………………75
5.1 Objection to Blind Consumption……………………………………………75
5.2 Consume with Protocol…………………………………………………76
5.3 Make Consumption Decision in Long Term Consideration………………78
5.4 Profit-seeking is Consistent with Confucius Morality-- the Doctrine of the Golden Mean and Ordinariness……………………………………………79
5.4.1 Mean Referred as Optimum Solution……………………………………81
5.4.2 Ordinariness Referred as Equilibrium Solution…………………………85
5.4.3 The Flexibility between the Rule and Discretion………………………86
5.4.4 Self-cultivation Might Guarantee a Peaceful and Affluent Society……89
Chapter 6 Conclusion…………………………………………………………92
Appendix…………………………………………………………99
A. The Trap of Poverty………………………………………………………99
B. Fan Chung-yen’s Great Relief Project……………………………………104
Glossary…………………………………………………………106
A. Historical……………………………………………………………………106
B. Geographical…………………………………………………………………108
Reference………………………………………………………………………109

參考文獻

I. English
Atkinson, A.B. and Stiglitz, J.E., 1980, Lectures on Public Economics, New York: McGraw-Hill.
Ando A. and F. Modigliani, (March) 1963, “The Life Cycle Hypothesis of Saving; Aggregate Implications and Tests,” American Economic Review, 53: 55-84.
Bertocchi, Graziella, 2002, “The Law of Primogeniture and the Transition from Landed Aristocracy to Industrial Democracy,” working paper on Universita’ di Modena e Reggio Emilia and CEPR.
Blaug, Mark, 1978, Economic Theory in Retrospect, 3rd edition, Cambridge [Eng.] ; New York: Cambridge University Press.
Brady, Dorothy, and Rose D. Friedman, 1947, “Savings and the Income Distribution,” In Studies in Income and Wealth X, New York: National Bureau of Economic Research: 247-65.
Braudel, Fernand, 1985-1986, The Wheels of Commerce; Civilization and Capitalism, 15th-18th Century Volume 2: New York: Harper & Row.
___, 1985, The Perspective of the World; Civilization and Capitalism, 15th-18th Century Volume 3: New York: Harper & Row.
Brewer, A., 1998, “Luxury and Economic Development: David Hume and Adam Smith,” The Scottish Journal of Political Economy, 45: 78-98.
Brook, Timothy, c1998, The Confusions of Pleasure: Commerce and Culture in Ming China, Berkeley: University of California Press.
Brook, Timothy and G. Blue, 1999, China and Historical Capitalism, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cunynghame, Henry, (March) 1892, “Some Improvements in Simple Geometrical Methods of Treating Exchange Value, Monopoly and Rent,” Economic Journal, 2: 35-52.
Dillingham, Alan E., Neil T. Skaggs, J. Lon Carlson., 1992, Macroeconomics:Individual Choice and its Consequences, Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Fiaschi, Davide and Rodolfo Signorino, (spring) 2003, “Consumption Patterns, Development and Growth: Adam Smith, David Ricardo and Thomas Robert Malthus,” European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, 10 (1): 5-24.
Flynn, Dennis O., and Arturo Giraldez, 1994, “China and the Manila Galleons,” in Japanese Industrialization and the Asian Economy, edited by A.J. H. Latham and Heita Kawakatsu, London: Routledge: 71-90.
___, (fall) 1995a, “Born with a ‘Silver Spoon’: The Origin of World Trade,” Journal of World History, 6 (2): 201-22.
___, (September) 1995b, “China and the Spanish Empire,” Paper presented at the 55th Annual Meeting of the Economic History Association, Chicago: 8-10.
___, (First quarter) 1996, “Silk for Silver: Manila-Macao Trade in the 17th Century,” Philippine Studies, 44: 52-68.
Frank, Andre Gunder, 1998, ReORIENT: Global Economy in the Asian Age, California: University of California Press.
Gilboy, E., (November) 1938, “The Propensity to Consume,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, 53: 120-40.
Glenn R. Morrow, 1928, Moralist and Philosopher, ed. J. M. Clark et al. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Gordon, Robert J., 2003, Macroeconomics, ninth edition, Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc.
Heckscher, Eli F., 1994, Mercantilism, London: Routledge.
Hicks, J. R., and R. G. D. Allen, (February) 1934, “A Reconsideration of the Theory of Value,” Economica, 1 (New Series): 52-76.
___, 1946, Value and Capital, 2nd ed., Oxford: Clarendon Press.
___, 1965, Capital and Growth, London: Oxford University Press.
Hobsbawm, Eric J., 1989, The Age of Empire, 1875-1914, New York:Vintage.
Hollander, 1928, Introduction to Ricardo’s Notes on Malthus, Baltimore: John Hopkins Press.
Huan, K’uan, 1973, Discourses on Salt and Iron : a Debate on State Control of Commerce and Industry in Ancient China, tr. from the Chinese of Huan K’uan ; with introd. & notes by Esson M. Gale, Taipei: Ch’eng Wen Pub..
Hunt, E. K., 1979, History of Economic Thought: A Critical Perspective, Belmont, Calif.: Wadsworth Pub. Co.
Intriligator, M. D., 1971, Mathematical Optimization and Economic Theory, Englewood, N.Y.: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Keynes, John M., [1936] 1951, The General Theory of Employment Interest and Money, London: Macmillan.
Kohler, Heinz, Intermediate Microeconomics, Georgia: Scott, Foresman and Company.
Landreth, Harry, and Colander, David C., 1989, History of Economic Theory, 2nd edition, Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Leibenstein, Harvey (May) 1950, “Bandwagon, Snob and Veblen Effects in the Theory of Consumers’ Demand,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, 64: 183-207.
Leslie, Stephen, [1902] 1991, History of English Thought in the Eighteenth Century, Bristol: Thoemmes. Facsim, of: 3rd ed.: London: Smith, Elder & Co.
Lucas, R.E., Jr., 1988, “On the Mechanics of Economic Development,” Journal of Monetary Economics, 22(1): 3-42.
Mandeville, Bernard, [1714] 1997, The Fable of the Bees: and Other Writings, abridged and edited with an introduction and notes, by E.J. Hundert, Indianapolis: Hackett Pub.
Marshall, M. G., (2000), “Luxury, Economic Development, and Work Motivation: David Hume, Adam Smith, and J. R. McCulloch,” History of Political Economy, 110: 1035-70.
Mason, Roger, (September) 2000, The Social Significance of Consumption: James Duessenberry’s Contribution to Consumer Theory, Journal of Economic Issues, XXXIV (3): 553-71.
Maverick, Lewis, 1954, Economic Dialogues in Ancient China: Selections from the Kuan-tzu, Carbondale, Ill: Far Eastern Publications.
Mencius, 1974, Mencius (or Meng-tzu), a new translation arranged and annotated for the general reader by W.A.C.H. Dobson, Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Mill, James, 1826, Elements of Political Economy, London: Baldwin, Cradock, and Joy. Reprinted in 1966, James Mill: Selected Economic Writings, edited by Donald Winch, 203-366. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Morgenstern, Oskar. (February) 1948, “Demand Theory Reconsidered,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, 62: 165-201.
Nicholson Walter, 1972, Microeconomic Theory: Basic Principles and Extensions, 7th edition, Orlando: Dryden Press.
Perrotta, C., 1997, “The Pre-classical Theory of Development: Increased Consumption Raises Productivity”, History of Political Economy, 29: 295-326.
Pigou, A. C., (March) 1903, “Some Remarks on Utility,” Economic Journal, 13: 58-68.
___, (March) 1913, “The Interdependence of Different Sources of Demand and Supply in a Market,” Economic Journal, 23: 19-24.
___, 1925, Memorials of Alfred Marshall, London: Macmillan.
Rima, Ingrid Hahne, 1991, Development of Economic Analysis, 5th edition, Boston: Irwin, Inc.
Robbins, Lionel, 1998, A History of Economic Thought, edited by Steven G. Medema and Warren J. Samuels, New Jersey : Princeton University Press.
Romer, P.M., 1986, “Increasing Returns and Long-Run Growth,” Journal of Political Economy, 94(5): 1002-37.
___, (winter) 1994, “The Origins of Endogenous Growth,” Journal of Economic Perspectives: 3-22.
Rosenberg, N., 1968, “Adam Smith, Consumer Tastes, and Economic Growth,” Journal of Political Economy, 76: 361-74.
Samueison, Paul, (February) 1938, “A Note on the Pure Theory of Consumer’s Behavior,” Economica, 5 (New Series): 61-71.
___,1947, Foundations of Economic Analysis, Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.
Say, Jean-Baptiste, [1803], A Treatise on Political Economy, or the production, distribution and consumption of wealth, First published, in French. Philadelphia: Lippincott, Grambo & Co., trans. In 1855, C. R. Prinsep, edtion, Clement C. Biddle (English translation).
___, 1880, A Treatise on Political Economy, or the production, distribution and consumption of wealth, first American Edition in 1821, reprint of 1880, Philadelphia: Claxton, Remsen & Haffelfinger.
Skousen, M., 1997, “The Perseverance of Paul Samuelson’s Economics,” Journal of Economic Perspective, 11(2): 137-52.
Smith, Adam, [1776] 1952, An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations, Chicago Encyclopaedia Britannica 1987, reprinting Fifth edition (1789), presented here, republished from: Edwin Cannan’s annotated edition, 1904, Methuen & Co., Ltd. First edition.
___, [1759]1911, The Theory of Moral Sentiments, London by George Bell & Sons, Ltd.
Ssu-ma, Chien, 1993, Records of the grand historian: Han dynasty II (or Shih chi.) by Sima Qian; translated by Burton Watson. Hong Kong; Renditions-Columbia University Press, New York: Rev. edtion.
Tilman, Rick, (March) 2006, “Colin Campbell on Thorstein Veblen on Conspicuous Consumption,” Journal of Economic Issues, XL (1): 97-111.
Veblen, Thoristein, 1899, The Theory of the Leisure Class, New York: The Modern Library, published by Random House, Inc.
West, E. G., 1969, Adam Smith, The Man and His Works, New Rochelle, N.Y.: Arlington House.
Whittaker, Edmund, 1960, Schools and Streams of Economic Thought, Chicago: Rand McNally.
Yang, Lien-sheng, 1969, “Economic Justification for Spending-An Uncommon Idea in Traditional China,” Studies in Chinese Institutional History, Cambridge Mass: Harvard University Press, 58-74.
II. Chinese
朱建民(1993)，《儒家的管理哲學》，臺北 :漢藝色研文化事業。
巫寶三(1989)，〈《侈靡》篇的經濟思想和寫作年代〉，收錄於巫寶三所著《管子經濟思想研究》，北京：中國社會科學出版社，頁143-171。
沈括(1968)，《夢溪筆談》，臺北 : 台灣商務印書館，國學基本叢書。
明宣宗(1967)，《明太祖寶訓》，臺北 : 中央研究院歷史語言研究所。
林麗月(1991)，〈晚明「崇奢」思想隅論〉，《國立台灣師範大學歷史學報》，第十九期，頁215-234。
_____(1994)，〈陸楫(1515-1552)崇奢思想再探〉，《新史學》，第五卷一期，頁131-153。
郭沫若(1954)，〈侈靡篇的研究〉，《歷史研究》，第3期，頁27-62。
陳國棟(1994)，〈有關陸楫「禁奢辨」之研究所涉及的學裡問題〉，《新史學》，第五卷二期，頁159-179。
_____ (1999)，〈從《蜜蜂寓言》到乾隆聖諭-傳統中西經濟思想與現代的意義〉，《當代》，第142期，頁44-5。
陸楫(1969)，《蒹霞堂雜著摘抄》，臺北：台灣商務印書館。
黃佐(1977)，《廣東通志》，香港：大東圖書公司。
黃彰健(1966)，《明神宗實錄校勘記》，臺北 : 中央研究院歷史語言研究所。
劉翠溶(1992)，〈中國人的財富觀念〉，收錄於《中國人的價值觀國際研討會論文集》，台北：漢學研究中心，頁705-720。
劉澤華(2000)，《中國傳統政治哲學與社會整合》，北京：中國社會科學出版社。
譚培文(1997)，〈孔楊墨的利益觀與現代市場觀念〉，《中國研究月刊》，頁55-63。
顧公燮(1917)，《消夏閑記摘抄》，上海 : 商務印書館。
龔煒(1983)，《巢林筆談》，臺北 : 新興書局。

指導教授

張明宗(Ming-chung Chang)

審核日期

2007-6-25

推文