• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文学位 >Economic struggles and economic development: Transformations in the development of a theme.
【24h】

Economic struggles and economic development: Transformations in the development of a theme.

机译：经济斗争与经济发展：主题发展的转变。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

This dissertation develops a Hobbesian reading of the texts of Adam Smith and Karl Marx on economic development.;The individualist tradition in social theory starts with the assumption that the social behavior of individuals is driven by self-interest. Thomas Hobbes deduced from this that granting freedom to individuals would inevitably lead to social chaos and generalized misery. Smith argued that granting freedom to individuals is a necessary condition of further economic development. He admitted that freedom leads to struggles over who is to control a society's resources and surplus product. This wastes resources and inhibits economic development. But attempts to prevent such struggles cannot succeed. The solution is to create social structures where how well individuals do in such struggles accurately reflects the extent to which they use resources productively and innovate better methods of production. This can be done by making everyone dependent on markets and forcing everyone (entrepreneurs, workers and consumers) to compete against everyone else in markets.;Marx struggled with and transformed the concepts and arguments of Smith, especially those concerning struggles relating to the production, distribution and uses of the surplus product. He argued that the Smithian process of economic development is also a Hobbesian process of exploitation of the workers who produce the wealth. He struggled to analyze the various ways in which the processes of economic development and exploitation mold and shape each other, treating each as a contributing condition of existence of the other, and neither as the determining cause.;There is an ongoing debate and tension within the individualist tradition between a neo-Smithian approach (the structure and distribution of property rights are the essential keys to understanding any historical situation) and a neo-Hobbesian approach (the types and distribution of power are the essential keys). Despite Marx's attempt to go beyond this dichotomy and construct an antiessentialist analysis of how the various aspects of historical situations mutually overdetermine each other, a similar dichotomy has dominated the Marxian tradition after Marx.
机译：本文以霍布斯理论为基础，对亚当·斯密和卡尔·马克思关于经济发展的著作进行了研究。；社会理论中的个人主义传统始于这样一个假设，即个人的社会行为是由自身利益驱动的。托马斯·霍布斯由此推断，赋予个人自由将不可避免地导致社会混乱和普遍的痛苦。史密斯认为，给予个人自由是进一步经济发展的必要条件。他承认，自由导致人们为控制一个社会的资源和剩余产品而斗争。这浪费了资源并阻碍了经济发展。但是，阻止这种斗争的尝试不会成功。解决的办法是建立一种社会结构，使个人在这种斗争中的表现准确地反映出他们有效地使用资源和创新更好的生产方法的程度。要做到这一点，可以使每个人都依赖市场，并迫使每个人（企业家，工人和消费者）与市场上的其他人竞争。马克思与史密斯的概念和论点进行了斗争，并进行了改造，特别是那些与生产有关的斗争，剩余产品的分配和使用。他认为，史密斯主义的经济发展过程也是霍布斯剥削生产财富的工人的过程。他努力地分析了经济发展和剥削过程相互塑造和塑造的各种方式，将彼此视为存在彼此的促成条件，而没有将其视为决定性原因。在新史密斯主义的方法（财产权的结构和分配是理解任何历史情况的关键）与新霍布斯主义的方法（权力的类型和分配是关键）之间的个人主义传统。尽管马克思试图超越这种二分法，对历史情况的各个方面如何相互决定性进行反本质主义分析，但类似的二分法主导了继马克思之后的马克思主义传统。

著录项

  • 作者

    Sinisi, John A.;

  • 作者单位

    University of Massachusetts Amherst.;

  • 授予单位 University of Massachusetts Amherst.;
  • 学科 Economics General.;Economics History.
  • 学位 Ph.D.
  • 年度 1992
  • 页码 298 p.
  • 总页数 298
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号